Defendants are not guilty.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the person who leased the 1st floor of the G Mutual Aid Association located in the Seo-gu in Gwangju, Seo-gu from September 2009 to September 24, 2012, and operated the first floor of the H branch center in the Seo-gu in Gwangju (hereinafter “Non-Party Mutual Aid Association”), and Defendant B is the mother of Defendant A, Defendant C is a de facto person in a de facto marital relationship with Defendant B, and Defendant C was the secretary general of the H branch of the Non-Party Mutual Aid Association.

Defendant

A From December 22, 2011, from around December 22, 2011, the victim J performed the operation of K and the above-mentioned across the boundary, Defendant A, at the time, unpaid KRW 100,000,000 in total of the rent and management expenses to the Non-Party Mutual-Aid Association. However, the above Defendant and K entered into a partnership agreement on the condition that K pays the above unpaid amount on a deposit basis.

(No. 46 of the Investigation Record) On the other hand, according to the petition submitted by the defendant (the Investigation Record No. 280 of the Investigation Record) and the request for disposition of audit results by the Non-Party Mutual-Aid Association (the Investigation Record No. 245 of the Investigation Record No. 245 of the Investigation Record), there is room to see that the substantial party to the same

around September 24, 2012, by disposing of all shares in the above boundary points to K, and there was no claim or obligation between Defendant A and K, and the victim J.

Defendant

A asserts to the effect that, at the time of disposing of the shares in the above Ansan, the period of service of the employees is less than one year, and there was no legal obligation to pay 5,000,000 won of retirement allowance to them, but it was settled at the victim's request, including this, and therefore, it should be returned from K.

In this regard, the victim asserts that the defendant's assertion is unfair because the victim was settled at the request of the defendant.

Meanwhile, Defendant A’s wife (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) was accused of a criminal charge of embezzlement in the course of his/her duties from Korea Howren Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”), and the Defendants jointly and severally guaranteed the Nonparty Company’s liability equivalent to the amount embezzled.