Deals & Cases
[Jeonju Criminal Litigation Attorney Occupational Embezzlement Defense Case] Jeonju Criminal Litigation Attorney Assists Manager Who Embezzled Tens of Millions of Won, Resulting in a Suspended Sentence
This is the account of a client who asked a Jeonju criminal litigation attorney to defend against a charge of occupational embezzlement. The client worked in a management position at a company and was responsible for storing the company's products. In the course of this work, the client committed embezzlement, and the client's situation was unfavorable.
1. The Client Who Came to the Jeonju Criminal Litigation Attorney
The client who came to the Jeonju criminal litigation attorney was working in a management position at a company when, unable to resist the temptation of money, the client committed embezzlement.
The client disclosed to the Jeonju criminal litigation attorney that, in collusion with a former employee who had left the company, the client diverted company goods and took the proceeds.
Because the number of incidents and the amount were not small, the client was soon discovered by the company's representative and ultimately faced a criminal complaint for occupational embezzlement.
The Earnest Request Made to the Jeonju Criminal Litigation Attorney
The client conveyed an earnest request to the Jeonju criminal litigation attorney. The client was at risk of receiving a heavy sentence for occupational embezzlement.
In particular, the fact that the offense was committed in collusion with several people, and the fact that it was committed on dozens of occasions, were likely to weigh unfavorably at trial.
The client requested that our Daeryun Jeonju criminal litigation attorney provide a defense to the fullest extent for the defense of the case.
Occupational Embezzlement Sentencing Explained by the Jeonju Criminal Litigation Attorney
Together with the Jeonju criminal litigation attorney, we will review the sentencing for occupational embezzlement.
Occupational Embezzlement Statutes
Criminal Act
Article 355 (Embezzlement, Breach of Trust) (1) A person who, having custody of another's property, embezzles it or refuses to return it shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine not exceeding 15 million won.
(2) The preceding paragraph shall also apply to a person who, handling another's affairs, obtains a pecuniary advantage or causes a third party to obtain it through an act in breach of his or her duty, thereby causing loss to the principal.
Article 356 (Occupational Embezzlement and Breach of Trust) A person who commits an offense under Article 355 in breach of an occupational duty shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten years or a fine not exceeding 30 million won.
Article 357 (Giving and Receiving of Property in Breach of Trust) (1) A person who, handling another's affairs, receives an improper solicitation in connection with that duty and obtains property or a pecuniary advantage, or causes a third party to obtain it, shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine not exceeding 10 million won.
(2) A person who gives the property or pecuniary advantage referred to in paragraph (1) shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than two years or a fine not exceeding 5 million won.
(3) The property referred to in paragraph (1) that is obtained by the offender or by a third party who is aware of the circumstances shall be confiscated. If it is impossible to confiscate the property, or if a pecuniary advantage has been obtained, the equivalent value shall be collected.
Article 358 (Concurrent Imposition of Suspension of Qualifications) Suspension of qualifications for not more than ten years may be imposed concurrently for the offenses under the preceding three Articles.
Article 359 (Attempts) An attempt to commit an offense under Articles 355 through 357 shall be punished.
The Checklist Emphasized by the Jeonju Criminal Litigation Attorney
The Jeonju criminal litigation attorney emphasizes that, with respect to sentencing for occupational embezzlement, the mitigating and aggravating factors must be reviewed.
Category | Negative | Positive | |
Principal Factors | Risk of recidivism, etc. | - Prior conviction for the same type of offense [within five years, a suspended sentence of imprisonment without labor or heavier, or three or more fines (including suspended sentences)] - Where the proceeds of the crime were intentionally concealed - Where the method of the offense was very serious | - Passive participation in the offense due to de facto pressure or the like - Where the degree of breach of duty was minor - Voluntary surrender or reporting of internal misconduct |
Other | - No settlement reached - Where the scale of actual loss is considerably large - Where serious harm was caused to the victim | - A de facto one-person company or family company - Where the scale of actual loss is considerably small - The victim's wish not to punish, or substantial recovery of the loss (including deposit with the court) | |
General Factors | Risk of recidivism, etc. | - A prior conviction for the same type of offense, or two or more prior convictions of a suspended sentence of imprisonment without labor or heavier - Repeated offenses - Blameworthy motive - Lack of social ties - No genuine remorse | - Where there was a purpose such as basic living expenses or medical costs as applicable - Clear social ties - Genuine remorse - No prior conviction of a suspended sentence of imprisonment without labor or heavier - Mitigating motive |
Other | - A leading role as an accomplice - Where a large number of victims (including employees, shareholders, creditors, and others) were caused - Where consideration for the offense was promised or received - Concealment of evidence, or an attempt to conceal it, after the offense - Where there was a purpose of strengthening control or preserving a position within the company - No effort to recover the loss - Causing harm during an attempt at settlement (excluding cases where another offense, such as coercion, is established) | - Passive participation as an accomplice - Where most of the proceeds of the crime could neither be spent nor retained - Substantial recovery of the loss (including deposit with the court) - Where the risk of loss was not greatly realized - Where the purpose was solely for the company's benefit - Where the defendant's health condition is very poor - Where the defendant's detention would impose excessive hardship on dependents - Where the ownership share in the affected company is high as applicable | |
2. Jeonju Criminal Litigation Attorney: “Keen Remorse and Efforts to Compensate the Loss”
Through detailed consultation with the client, Daeryun Law Firm assembled a Jeonju criminal litigation attorney team composed of multiple professionals with substantial experience in occupational embezzlement cases.
The Daeryun Jeonju criminal litigation attorney team argued for a lenient disposition on the grounds that the defendant felt keen remorse for the offense in this case and had made efforts to compensate for the loss, among other factors.
Jeonju Criminal Litigation Attorney Establishes That the Defendant Voluntarily Surrendered for the Offense
The Jeonju criminal litigation attorney established that the defendant had voluntarily surrendered to the investigative authorities for the offense and requested that this factor also be taken into account.
Jeonju Criminal Litigation Attorney Emphasizes That the Defendant Is Seriously Remorseful for the Offense
The Jeonju criminal litigation attorney emphasized that the defendant acknowledged the offense in its entirety and was seriously remorseful.
Jeonju Criminal Litigation Attorney: The Defendant Made Efforts to Compensate the Loss
The Jeonju criminal litigation attorney stated that the defendant had made efforts to compensate for the loss.
However, the attorney explained that, although the defendant sought to compensate the full amount of the loss as well as the corresponding interest, the amount demanded by the victim's side was excessive, and a settlement was not reached.
3. Client Released on a Suspended Sentence With the Assistance of the Jeonju Criminal Litigation Attorney
The court accepted the arguments of the Daeryun Jeonju criminal litigation attorney and rendered a judgment stating, “The defendant is sentenced to one year of imprisonment. However, the execution of the said sentence is suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final.”
The client in this case stood trial in a situation in which the victim had not granted forgiveness.
With the assistance of the Jeonju criminal litigation attorney, the client was able to avoid an actual custodial sentence of imprisonment, received a suspended sentence, and was able to return to the client's family.
Daeryun Law Firm (LLC) operates a criminal practice group, providing consultation and urgent response 365 days a year, 24 hours a day.
In addition, the Daeryun criminal practice group, through coordination with its examination of evidence, digital forensics, and security groups, helps collect and analyze evidence that an individual would find difficult to gather, so that it may be used effectively at trial and in other proceedings.
Depending on the scale of the case, a specialized team of 3 to 20 legal professionals in criminal matters and examination of evidence is assembled to provide a defense tailored to the client. If you are involved in a criminal case, please reach out to the Daeryun Jeonju attorney.
![[전주형사소송변호사 업무상횡령 방어사례] 전주형사소송변호사, 수천만 원 횡령한 관리자 조력해 집행유예 받아내](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fd1tgonli21s4df.cloudfront.net%2Fupload%2Fseo%2Fsuccess%2F20240703042803032.webp&w=828&q=100 "업무상횡령 집행유예 판결문")
This content is based on actual cases handled by Daeryun Law LLC and has been partially adapted. All copyrights belong to Daeryun Law LLC.
Unauthorized reproduction, copying or distribution may result in legal action under applicable laws.
Occupational embezzlement: Want a faster, more detailed consultation?
Consult aspecialized attorney
Related Information
Explore legal information related to this case.
How to Respond When Detected for Voice Phishing, Explained by a Chinese Consultation Attorney
What Are the Requirements for the Crime of Disclosure of Secrets and the Response Strategy When Occupational Secrets Are Leaked?
Requirements for the Crime of Forgery and Uttering of a Private Document, the Statute of Limitations for Forgery of a Private Document, and Responses to Criminal Punishment
Daeryun's Key Strengths
Litigation strategy using Daeryun's own AI & IT technology
More than 240 key members
1,200+ cases handled per month
* 2025년 월평균 기준
Complies with Korean Bar Association Advertising Regulations Article 4 (1)
more strengths
Book a legal
consultation with an attorney
All consultations are reviewed by a specialized attorney first,
so they are conducted by appointment only.
Phone consultation
1800-7905
Available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year
Online consultation
We provide tailored
legal services for our clients.
Chat consultation
KakaoTalk channel
Daeryun Law LLC Attorneys
Related Members
View more
Consult in other languages
Popular Columns
View moreThe Meaning of Non-Referral, and Are There Differences Among the Types of Decisions?
Establishment of the Crime of Fraud: Determining the Requirements, Case Analysis, and Sentencing Guidelines
Criminal Record Inquiry and Expungement: How to Avoid Disadvantages
The Police Investigation Process, Methods of Response, and Tips for Giving Statements
Criminal Cases: Litigation Procedure, Types of Dispositions, and How to Respond
Previous
[Gunsan Criminal Attorney Assistance Case] Client Who Forged an Identification Card Receives a Suspended Sentence With the Assistance of the Gunsan Criminal Attorney
Next
[Case Assisted by a Busan Criminal Attorney] With the Assistance of a Busan Criminal Attorney, a Suspended Sentence Was Achieved in a Fraud Case
View list
Do you have more questions?
