If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

[Basic Facts] From July 2004 to October 2012, the Defendant served as the management office of E Co., Ltd. (Representative F) (hereinafter “instant building”), a management company of E Co., Ltd. (the “D”) which is an officetel and a commercial complex building located in Seongbuk-si, Seongbuk-si, Seoul, and was engaged in overall management affairs, such as management accounts, facility management, cost and cleaning management of the instant building.

On July 20, 2012, the sectional owners of the instant building constituted D Management Body (hereinafter referred to as the “Management Body”) on the grounds that E Company did not ask the opinions of sectional owners after completion of the building and continued the management of the instant building, and filed an application for provisional disposition prohibiting interference with business with the Sungwon District Court’s Sungnam Branch (the applicant: Management Body, E Company, Management Director A, etc.) around July 20, 2012.

On the other hand, the management body mobilized service personnel on July 30, 2012, and occupied the management office of the building of this case as a real force. On the other hand, E Co., Ltd. employed 43 service personnel on August 7, 2012 and restored the possession of the above management office to its real force.

【Criminal Facts】

1. On August 23, 2012, the Defendant spent expenses of KRW 11,00,000,000 for the appointment of a defense counsel in the E-stock company office located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, with the instruction of representative director F, from the carried forward profit surplus out of the management expenses of the building of this case where the Defendant was kept under the direction of representative director F.

However, the case of the above provisional disposition is a dispute concerning the management authority between D Management Body and E Co., Ltd., and thus, it was not a matter pertaining to the management authority of the building of this case.

Accordingly, the Defendant, in collusion with F (Issuance of a Summary Order on August 23, 2013), embezzled the carried-over earned surplus amounting to KRW 11 million, which was kept on duty for the sectional owners of the instant building.

2. The Defendant, around September 10, 2012, at the office of the above E Co., Ltd., and the instant case.