The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On November 6, 2017, the Defendant, as the representative director of a construction business chain B, was awarded a subcontract for “D” which was ordered by the victim C, Inc., Ltd., for the construction cost at approximately KRW 300 million.

From December 2, 2017 to June 2018, the Defendant proceeded with the process of the above construction in the name of the victim company about 90% under the name of the victim company. However, the Defendant failed to pay a total of KRW 62 million for equipment costs and personnel expenses for on-site employees invested in the above construction, and thus the said construction was suspended.

In this regard, on July 20, 2018, the Defendant stated to the effect that “F (Nam and 42 years of age) who is the representative director of the victim company in the office of the victim company located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam obtained a loan at the G Goung branch, and C shall complete the construction by obtaining a loan of KRW 70 million when the joint and several surety is at the G Goung branch, and shall be responsible and repaid within the due date.”

However, in fact, the Defendant’s personal debt amounting to KRW 366 million was not remaining, and the Defendant’s personal debt amounted to KRW 179 million. The Defendant’s personal debt amounted to KRW 100 million. In the process of securing the above personal debt, the apartment apartment located in the Defendant’s name was in fact not subject to property value, and the “I” company’s separate proceeding was in progress due to the shortage of funds after receiving KRW 30 million in advance. The “J”, “K” and “D” were in a state of failure or de facto suspension of progress due to the shortage of funds. In relation to the above “D”, even if the Defendant had already received the construction payment from the victim company in full, there was no way to procure additional equipment costs and equipment costs, etc. required for the completion of the construction work, and even if resolving overdue equipment costs and personnel expenses with the Defendant’s joint and several surety, there was no way to procure additional equipment costs, etc. from the victim company.