A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, from November 24, 1997 to July 201, 201, is a director of the E- which is for electrical construction business from around November 24, 1997, and has overall control over the field management affairs of materials owned by the said company and the construction site management affairs conducted by the said company.

On May 17, 2008, the Defendant embezzled waste cables worth KRW 26450,000,000,000,000 from the market price of the damaged company owned by the damaged company for the purpose of the damage company, to Ga on the water, and received 10,000,000 from the new bank account in the name of the Defendant as the selling price for the waste cable, and used it for private purposes around that time, from April 19, 2013, up to 19 times in total, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquire about details of financial transactions in the principal and liquidity transactions;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of criminal facts (Optional to imprisonment);

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution [The grounds for sentencing being taken into account) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution [the scope of recommended punishment in accordance with the sentencing guidelines] [the scope of recommended punishment in accordance with the sentencing guidelines]] mitigated area (6 to 500 million won) of Class 1 (6 to 2 years) of the Act on the Punishment of Embezzlement [the sentence] [the amount of damage is not significant; there are no special criminal records except a fine once in favor of the damaged company that has reached the closure of its business; the defendant thought that he was actually a single company; and he paid provisional penalty exceeding the amount of damage to the victimized

In full view of the sentencing conditions shown in the trial process of this case, such as the defendant's age, sexual conduct, family relationship, family environment, motive and means of crime, and circumstances after the crime, the punishment is determined as ordered within the scope of the recommended punishment.