The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Around July 2015, the Defendant, as the representative director of the Note B, entered into a contract (total construction cost of KRW 3,650,000,000) related to the D New Construction Works (hereinafter “D Construction Works”). Around August 21, 2015, around August 21, 2015, the Defendant entered into a subcontract (in the case of a stock company, the mark “owner”) with the victim F (hereinafter “D”) actually operated by E and the subcontract (in the case of a stock company, the marks”) with respect to reinforced concrete among the said new construction works.

Around September 2016, the Defendant, at the site of the Cheongju-si D New Construction Project (Cheongju-si), performed construction work in accordance with the subcontract with the above C. However, as the Defendant was unable to receive KRW 1,004,00,000 (G, H part of the construction cost and the above D construction cost) including KRW 619,00,000,000 for the said D construction cost, and caused the Defendant to exercise the right of retention over the said new construction site, the Defendant, upon exercising the F’s right of retention, had concerns over the delay in the overall process and completion of the D new construction works and in the sale in lots and future loans secured by the said building, paid KRW 1,00,000 for the said construction cost to E, a de facto operator of F, at the construction site at the above site at around September 2016, and paid KRW 1,00,000,000 for the said construction price to be paid by 261,200, supra.”

However, in fact, the Defendant thought that F had paid in full the construction cost to F in C even if the exercise of the right of retention was discontinued, the Defendant did not intend to pay in lieu of F the unpaid construction cost of KRW 1,00,000,000,000 to F. At that time, the Defendant was against the IF loans of KRW 3,000,000 and other companies.