The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is the husband and wife who completed the marriage report with the deceased C around June 16, 200, and the victim D, E, and F are children of C born between the deceased C and his former wife G.

On August 21, 2003, the Defendant completed a registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of sale on the “Seoul-si H, 228.7 square meters, and the concrete horizontal roof of reinforced concrete structure on the ground, 1, 20.23 square meters, 120.23 square meters for Class I neighborhood living facilities (retail stores) of the first floor, 20.4 square meters for Class II neighborhood living facilities (offices) of the second floor, 48.27 square meters for multi-family houses of the second floor, 48.27 square meters for multi-family houses of the third floor, 124.73 square meters for multi-family houses of the third floor, 124.73 square meters for multi-family houses of the fourth floor,” but the actual owner of the above real estate was C and the Defendant was the trustee registered only in the name

On October 2, 2006, the Defendant, as a result of C’s death on October 2, 2006, embezzled 2/9 shares in the above real estate, equivalent to KRW 135,075,422, which is the share of inheritance of the victim D, by establishing a collateral security right of KRW 420,000,000 for creditors’ original agricultural cooperatives, the maximum debt amount, and the maximum debt amount, at will around May 4, 2007.

(2) The facts charged in the instant case are crimes falling under Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act. According to Articles 361 and 328(2) of the same Act, where the victim and the offender have a lineal blood relative, spouse, relative living together, family member living together, or non-spouseial relationship between the victim and the offender, a public prosecution may be instituted only when the victim files a complaint. According to the records, the defendant and the victim D are not living together, and the facts that the victim D revoked the complaint against the defendant on April 3, 2013, which is after the prosecution of this case. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327(5) of the Criminal Procedure Act.