Defendants are not guilty.

1. While the facts charged of the instant case was conducted in the name of Defendant A with the name of “E” and with the name of “E,” the victim F and D around 2007 entered into a partnership agreement with the content that the victim F will provide the name of the business operator and technology and that the victim F will receive 50 percent of each revenue on the condition that the project is ordered to receive.

Since then, the victim F was not paid 517 million won for the construction cost from the two Dog Construction Co., Ltd., the owner of the loan in the course of the construction of the Dogra in the construction of the Dogra in the Dog-si, and the victim F exercised the lien at the construction site.

However, around January 201, the Defendants, in collusion with D, prepared a hump for the waiver of lien and construction work to two Yang Construction Co., Ltd. without the consent of the victim F, and received only KRW 180 million as the construction cost. From the two Yang Construction Co., Ltd., the Defendants were paid KRW 30 million around January 5, 201, among the above KRW 180 million from the two Yang Construction Co., Ltd., and embezzled KRW 15 million on March 11, 201, by arbitrarily distributing KRW 15 million with D around that time while in custody for the victim F.

2. In full view of the following facts, the copy of the police statement concerning F, each statement of the police interrogation protocol against the Defendants, each statement of the police interrogation protocol against the Defendants, each of the waiver of the construction and each of the following facts acknowledged by the statement of the waiver of the right of retention, the Defendants received KRW 45 million from the two Yang Construction Co., Ltd., together with D, without consent of the F that exercised the right of retention, unilaterally prepared the construction waiver and the waiver of the right of retention to the two Yang Construction Co., Ltd., and received at will, without any consent of the F that exercised the right of retention, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

F Around August 2007, by lending the name of Taecheon Construction Co., Ltd., Ltd., F was awarded a contract for the construction of Jin Jindo Hailty at the time of Pinjin City Co., Ltd., and at the time of lending the name of Defendant A.