The plaintiff is paid at the place to be used or paid by the F in accordance with F's direction, and there is no money used individually.

The amount of F’s income managed by the Plaintiff was 20,250,000 won each month (20,750,000 won that occurred at the end of the end of the end of the month in 2015). All of the F’s interest on loans, real estate rental income, value added tax on real estate rental income, medical insurance premium, automobile insurance premium, life fire insurance premium, etc. were disbursed every month, and considerable money was given to the Defendants.

The reasons why F was directly paid F's own account is that F's account was received directly for the convenience of deposit because F's account was not Internet (phone) banking, and the money was also used for F.

Nevertheless, if the Plaintiff continuously embezzled F's money, the Defendants demanded the payment of damages, and thus seek confirmation of the existence of the obligation.

After confirming that F does not confirm the balance of the ordinary passbook and the details of transactions, the Plaintiff’s assertion by the Defendants: (a) embezzled the sum of KRW 1,532,164,037 (the sum embezzled from the F Agricultural Cooperative Account at KRW 1,094,238,150,040, embezzled at KRW 52,746,040,040, embezzled from the Busan Bank Account at KRW 163,450,118,000,000 embezzled from the National Bank Account at KRW 221,729,729,729,729,729,729,729) by means of private use.

As above, the circumstances presented by the Defendants based on the Plaintiff’s embezzlement are ① the Plaintiff withdrawn money from the F’s account with cash and check, but did not provide reasonable explanation as to the place of use and explanation.