However, as to the Defendants for one year from the date of the final judgment of this case, the Defendants are above.

In full view of the facts admitted by the prosecutor’s amendment of indictment and the records of this case, the facts charged are modified to the extent that the defendants’ exercise of defense rights is not disadvantaged.

Defendant

B is the actual owner registered in the name of F, who purchased No. 01, No. 101, No. 102, and No. 201 of the 1st floor of the E apartment commercial building constructed on the land outside of D, public city.

Defendant

A is the smaller children of Defendant B.

On November 21, 2003, F and Defendant A sold the said No. 4 of the shopping mall to the victim G in KRW 189 million. On February 26, 2005, F and Defendant A were issued with the power of delegation from the victim to Defendant A to delegate the right to receive the lease deposit and the rent, and the right to receive the lease deposit and the rent was not delegated.

When the Defendants leased the commercial building in accordance with the delegation above, they should not receive the rental deposit and rent from the tenants to the victim, and if they receive the rental deposit and rent on behalf of the victim, they should immediately transfer it to the victim. However, on September 20, 2007, at the first floor of the commercial building, A entered into a lease contract with the victim H and the first floor of the commercial building, as if he had the right to receive the rental deposit, and instead used it for personal purposes from around that time to April 2012 without delivering it to the victim G.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to receive money from the victim I, H, J, K, and L, and embezzled the money in custody for the victim G.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the witness M;

1. Each legal statement of witness G and N;

1. Doing L, H and K.