The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case served as the representative director of the victim E, who entered into a design change technical service contract with D Co., Ltd., the executor company of the New Construction Corporation.

On January 7, 2015, at the office of D Co., Ltd. on the F and the first floor, the Defendant asked the victim to transfer part of the service cost to G account under the name of G operated by the Defendant. On the 9th of the same month, the Defendant received KRW 22 million as the Defendant’s request from G corporation account, and embezzled for the victim by voluntary consumption at around that time.

2. Details of the lawsuit brought by the defendant and his defense counsel;

A. A party to a contract that entered into a design change technical service contract with D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) is not the victim E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”), but the individual is the defendant, and the service cost paid by D is equivalent to the defendant’s success in the technical review, remuneration and work cost, and thus, the defendant will be attributed to the defendant. The victim Co., Ltd. merely holds a pagecom established by the defendant with H for issuing the tax invoice. Thus, the above service cost does not constitute “other’s property.”

B. Even if the service cost paid by D constitutes property to be attributed to the victim company, the defendant received it and appropriated it for the victim company to repay the claim for expenses incurred in performing its duties, such as lodging expenses, food expenses, and transportation expenses, which the victim company should pay to the defendant. Thus, there is no intention of embezzlement or illegal acquisition by the defendant.

3. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s act of using a part of the above service price in the account in G’s name on the premise that the party to the contract entered into the design modification technical service contract with D is the victim company, the Defendant asserts that the party to the contract entered into the said design modification technical service contract is the Defendant.