If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

On June 20, 2014, the Defendant organized the number fraternity of KRW 11,26 old accounts, KRW 20,000,000,000 in the D restaurant located in Gwangju-si, and KRW 8,000 in the accounts, and KRW 80,000 in the accounts of KRW 20,000 in the monthly payment, and KRW 1,000 in the accounts of KRW 1,000 in the monthly payment (hereinafter “the instant order fraternity”), and the victim F received the number fraternity from the above E and paid the monthly payment to the Defendant’s account. In such a case, the Defendant, as the main agent, violated his duty to pay the monthly payment to the victims of KRW 18,00 in the manner of acquiring property damage and paying the same amount to the victims on January 20, 2016.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The witness F and E’s legal statement;

1. Partial statement of witness G;

1. Details of transactions of each passbook and books of accounts;

1. Letters and written confirmation [this is not recognized as a member in relation to the subject matter in which the subject matter is located separately from the subject matter, and thus, even if the subject matter is paid through the intermediate subject matter, but does not have a status as a member in relation to the subject matter, the crime of breach of trust is not established against the person who did not have a status as a member in relation to the subject matter (see Supreme Court Decision 82Do2460, Apr. 12, 1983). The defendant and his defense counsel are the subject matter managed by E, which is the intermediate subject matter, so the status as a member in relation to the defendant as the subject matter is not recognized.

The argument is asserted.

Ultimately, the key issue of this case is whether the injured party has a position as a fraternity in relation to the accused or whether it is limited to the fraternity managed by E, an intermediary leader.

The evidence adopted and examined by this Court is recognized as follows.