An application filed by an applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

From August 1, 2012 to February 25, 2016, the Defendant is a person who has engaged in the production management affairs of the Dispute Settlement Bank Co., Ltd., and D is a person who has held office as the head of the managing division of the victim Co., Ltd. from April 2, 2015 to July 25, 2016, and the Defendant and D agreed to jointly establish and operate the Dispute Settlement Bank Co., Ltd., which is the same kind of company after the Defendant’s retirement, to jointly operate it, and the above D provided the Credit Settlement Bank Co., Ltd. with the victim Co., Ltd., by deducting the original parts of the victim Co., Ltd., and the Defendant sold the said original parts in the name of the Credit Settlement Bank Co., Ltd., and conspired to divide the profits therefrom.

Accordingly, around February 19, 2016, the above D provided to the Dispute Resolution E at the victim company's office located in F in the Gyeonggi-si, which had been in his/her custody in the warehouse at will, in order to arbitrarily cut off the number of scam 2D 80,000, which is the main unit of the Mcam 2D 80,000, and the Defendant processed this original group and sold it to G at KRW 1,200,000, from that time until April 27, 2016 by the same method until April 27, 2016, as described in the attached list of crimes, arbitrarily disposed of the total amount of KRW 30,840,00,000, total market price of the Mcact 2D 2,056,00,000.

Accordingly, the Defendant, in collusion with the above D, embezzled an amount equivalent to KRW 30,840,00 in total market price of KRW 2,056,00.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal testimony of witness D;

1. Each prosecutor's interrogation protocol concerning D;

1. The prosecutor's statement concerning H;

1. Each police statement made to I;

1. The defendant and the defense counsel paid the price to purchase the original unit to D in the course of establishing and operating a stock company E on their own by the defendant, and paid the price to D for the purchase of the original unit in collusion with D. This is merely the fact that the defendant was aware that D would purchase the original unit by paying a reasonable price.