The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The Defendant in the facts charged in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government stated the facts charged in D Co., Ltd. as “D,” but is deemed as a clerical error of “D Co., Ltd.” and thus corrected.

is a person operating the business.

On December 2, 2012, the Defendant, through E, had the victim F, a company employee, established “G project operation corporation as H corporation,” and had 5% of the shares of the corporation to be established by the Defendant.

The above asset management company has invested capital of KRW 500 million equivalent to 5% of the shares of the project corporation and has decided to act as a consultant for the project, finance, and overall operation.

In order to show the fact that the asset management company is scheduled to proceed with the procedures for the establishment of the asset management company within one to two weeks, and to show that other investors are prepared to invest in the asset management company, the investment fund shall be received as soon as possible and the remaining certificate shall be obtained.

The terms and conditions of investment contract will first be set up a letter of payment on the face of transfer of KRW 500 million, as it is possible to establish a corporation with other investors only after proof of balance at present.

2. The term “assumed.”

On December 28, 2012, the victim believed the statement of the defendant, and received a house security loan from the bank and remitted it to the bank account in the name of the D Co., Ltd. in the name of the defendant.

As such, while the Defendant received remittance of KRW 500 million from the injured party in relation to the above G development project under the name of the asset management company’s capital stock, the above development project and the establishment of the asset management company were delayed from February 2, 2013 to October 2014, the Defendant embezzled KRW 500,000 by arbitrarily using the operating expenses of the said development project or the asset management company, which are not related to the establishment of the said company, and the Defendant and E’s benefits, etc.

2. The defendant's argument is that he received KRW 500 million from F to D Co., Ltd. under the pretext of investment in D Co., Ltd.