beta
Text
The defendant is innocent.
Reasons
1. The summary of the facts charged is a person who, from September 16, 2010, worked as the chief director of the interior of the company called “D” operated by the victim C from around September 16, 201, established the victim C, etc. and “Co. E” and worked as a person responsible for the tethical field around April 14, 201.
As above, the Defendant, as the office manager of the “D” operated by the victim, engaged in the duties of supervision at the site of interior works and the payment of the construction cost to the trading company, etc., and had the Defendant supervise the “the interior works of the G Hospital located in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F Hospital” during the period from December 17, 2010 to March 201.
1. Around December 17, 2010, the Defendant: (a) transferred KRW 5,500,000 to the victim’s “the interior works of the Mapo-gu Seoul F G Hospital” that the victim received from H for the purpose of paying construction expenses to the subcontractor; (b) was transferred KRW 700,000 for the same purpose on January 4, 201; (c) was used to pay construction expenses to the subcontractor; and (d) was used to pay only KRW 2,00,000 to the subcontractor for the benefit of the victim; and (e) was embezzled by arbitrarily using the remainder of KRW 4,20,000,000 for the purpose of paying construction expenses to the subcontractor; and (e)
2. On March 2, 2011, the Defendant continued to borrow KRW 2 million from the victim for the purpose of paying construction expenses to the subcontractor with respect to the foregoing interior work in the non-permanent area Seoul director, and embezzled 700,000 won for the same purpose on April 12, 2011; KRW 1.2 million for the same purpose on May 2, 201; KRW 8 million for the same purpose on May 9, 201; and KRW 8 million for the same purpose on May 9, 2011; while he/she used only 6 million for the payment of construction expenses to the subcontractor; and used the remainder 4.1 million for the daily expenses of the subcontractor and 4.1 million won for the Defendant’s business at around that time, he/she arbitrarily used it for the same purpose as the expenses of the LAD and
Accordingly, the defendant has a total sum of 8.3 million won, which was kept on duty for the victim.