On April 1, 201, the Defendant received KRW 70 million from the injured party to the Defendant’s husband C as the purchase fund for apartment buildings on or around April 1, 201, and transferred KRW 50 million to the Defendant’s account under the same name as the Defendant’s husband C. On or around June 17, 2011, the Defendant received total of KRW 120,000 for the victim as the purchase fund for apartment buildings.

While the Defendant was in custody of the said money, he borrowed KRW 10 million on June 23, 201, KRW 10 million on June 28, 2011, KRW 10 million on June 28, 201, KRW 10 million on July 27, 2011, KRW 30 million on the method of remitting the said money to D, and he embezzled KRW 40 million on a voluntary basis among the said money in custody, such as using the said money for daily expenses.

2. The above facts charged constitute a crime subject to prosecution under Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act, which constitutes a crime subject to prosecution where a victim’s accusation can be instituted only upon the victim’s accusation according to the case of relatives’ relative status under Article 328(2) of the Criminal Act, which is applicable mutatis mutandis by Article 361 of the Criminal Act.

According to the records, it is recognized that the victim who was related to the defendant as the large-scale elderly of the defendant has withdrawn the complaint against the defendant around April 26, 2016, which was after the public prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, the public prosecution is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act.