Since the defendant used the personal expenses of the defendant while executing the management expenses of the above apartment house, if the general affairs of the above apartment house are changed, there was a duty to settle the management expenses and to pay the personal expenses already paid by the defendant to the next general affairs.

Nevertheless, from December 2009 to November 5, 2013, the Defendant paid KRW 34,886,206 in the aggregate of KRW 20,00,000 deposit, KRW 5,00,000 for the president’s withdrawal, KRW 2,291,830 for the unpaid management expenses, KRW 1,185,784 for the president’s deposit, and KRW 390,90 for the abolished sales expenses. However, the Defendant paid KRW 21,36,356,00 for KRW 213,549,850 for the next general manager, while the Defendant did not pay KRW 13,50 for the remainder.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated his duties and did not pay the remaining settlement amount of KRW 13,549,850 to the above D, thereby acquiring property benefits equivalent to the above amount, and the above apartment residents suffered damages equivalent to the above amount.

Judgment

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel’s arguments asserted that the crime of breach of trust is not established since the Defendant merely tried to settle accounts according to the grounds calculated accurately, and did not have an intent to obtain unlawful acquisition.

2. The following facts can be acknowledged in full view of the witness D’s legal statement, each police suspect interrogation protocol against the defendant, monthly revenue and expenditure statement (Evidence Nos. 13, 16) and the overall purport of oral argument.

(1) The defendant is under investigation after complaint is filed by the senior secretary D, the criminal defendant around March 6, 2014.