A A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5 million, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3 million.

The above fine shall be imposed on the Defendants.

Defendant

A is the chief representative of C Co., Ltd., and Defendant B is the representative director of the above company, who has been engaged in the business, such as consulting on investment in each real estate, bidding agency, etc.

From March 26, 2016 to May 17, 2016, the Defendants received a total of KRW 80,500,000 as a bidding bond from the victim F to the victim during the period from March 26, 2016 to May 17, 2016, upon receiving a request from the victim F to make a bid for an auction of real estate. From April 19, 2016 to May 30, 2016, the Defendants spent KRW 42,440,00 in total with the victim’s bidding bond, the expenses for an apartment awarded in the name of the victim, and finally stored KRW 38,060,00 in the name of a bid bond for an auction of the apartment under the victim’s name, and used the said money for the purpose of the existing investor or the existing investor’s investment bond, etc. from around May 30, 2016 to around November 2016.

As a result, the Defendants conspired and embezzled the victim's money in the course of business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. A certificate of performance of obligations (1,00 million won);

1. A certificate of performance of obligations (2,8530 won);

1. Details of transactions;

1. Details of transfer;

1. Application for membership in the dispute resolution council;

1. The current status of the successful bid for auction for the F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning the details of deposit and withdrawal to the corporate savings bank account;

1. Defendants of the relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Articles 356, 355(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act, and selection of fines, respectively.

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act does not include the amount embezzled by the Defendants.

However, the defendants appear to reflect the mistake by recognizing the crime of this case, and the defendants actually performed the auction business of the victimized person, and the victim seems to have been able to gain profit by doing so, and the injured person by agreement with the injured person.