The defendant shall be innocent.

Around February 2009, the Defendant entered into a business agreement with the victim G to pay 50% of the profits accrued from operating the said restaurant instead of investing a cash of KRW 330 million in the said restaurant in the said restaurant.

Nevertheless, on September 1, 2014, the Defendant entered into a contract with H to transfer the above restaurant at KRW 600 million without the consent of the victim. On September 1, 2014, the Defendant received KRW 600 million from the above H to the account in the name of the Defendant in the name of the Daegu Bank under the name of the Defendant for the transfer of the money from the said H to the account of the money for the transfer of the victim, and disbursed the amount equivalent to KRW 253,835,120 for employees, such as the payment of overdue wages and the payment of goods, etc., and then, the remaining KRW 346,164,80 for employees was settled with the victim or used with the consent of the victim, but at

Judgment

1. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by this Court, the following facts are recognized:

① In 2009, the Defendant and I had been engaged in timber export business in Russia, and the Defendant was engaged in food material supply business.

② The first has paid KRW 30 million to the Defendant, and the Defendant used the said money to pay KRW 20 million to J and G, who is a form of punishment, as part of the I’s profits, while entirely operating the F. and paying KRW 7 million from KRW 200,000.

③ Both the F Lease Agreement and the name of the business operator registered was G, but G and J did not participate in the operation of the F.

2. A specific decision-making partnership has an agreement that two or more persons agree to operate a joint project by mutual contribution (Article 703 of the Civil Code). The type or content of the project shall not be limited unless it violates social order, but shall be common.