The Defendant, as the representative of D, entered into an agreement on the management, operation, and consignment of the E and E Autonomous Community Support Center (hereinafter “instant agreement”) around August 10, 2016, and was entrusted by E with the management and operation of the E Autonomous Community Support Center (hereinafter “Support Center”) from August 10, 2016 to December 31, 2018.

On October 6, 2016, the Defendant: (a) received the delivery of KRW 291,040,600 from the Nong Bank account (F) of “D” for the management and operation of the Support Center under the above Convention; and (b) embezzled KRW 284,590,000 in total eight times during the period from around that time to October 17, 201, using the money for personal debt repayment and the payment of employee’s benefits to the Jeju Branch, etc. of “D,” which was kept for E.

Summary of Evidence

1. Entry of the defendant in part in the first trial record;

1. Each legal statement of witness G and H;

1. Determination on the consignment agreement on consignment management and operation of the E-government Community Support Center, application for the payment of entrusted project costs, application for the payment of private consignment charges, project details of the agreement, request for the implementation of the agreement, copies of passbooks, deposit documents, official replys, and verification of the balance of the consignment payments, the results of inquiry into the details of the consignment settlement report in 2016, three copies of the Nong Bank transaction report, Nong Bank transaction records in the name of the suspect A, the details of the account transaction in the name of the suspect A, the defendant and defense counsel's assertion

1. The summary of the argument is that the Defendant is deemed to have been entrusted with the business of the support center from E to have been entirely responsible for the Defendant, and in relation to the instant case, the Defendant’s KRW 291,040,600, which was paid by E (hereinafter “project cost of this case”) is not a subsidy or entrustment fee, but a subsidy or entrustment fee, and is owned by the Defendant.

In addition, the said money is for the business purpose of this case.