The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. Around December 4, 2012, the Defendant, at the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Seocho-gu’s Seocho-gu coffee shop, written guarantee of E, which is the object of borrowing KRW 70 million from the victim D, and as security, transferred the part equivalent to KRW 70 million out of the Defendant’s credit amounting to KRW 90 million against F (hereinafter “the instant credit”). At the beginning of the first half of the second half of the second half of the year where the said F was not notified of the transfer of the said credit, the Defendant embezzled the said F’s credit amount of KRW 90 million for the victim, while the Defendant was in custody for the victim, by repaying the Defendant’s private use, such as living expenses and consumption of debt, etc. around that time.

2. Determination

A. In a case where a property right is transferred to a creditor for the purpose of securing a claim, which form of security contract is to be determined specifically by the intent of the parties for each individual case, or, in the absence of any other special agreement, it is presumed as security by transfer of a weak meaning that requires settlement procedures between the parties (see Supreme Court Decision 9Da14433, Dec. 10, 199, etc.). Unless otherwise agreed, the security right to the property transferred for the purpose of securing a claim may be exercised by the method chosen by the creditor during the settlement or settlement of accounts, unless there is any other agreement. Thus, in order for the security right to be transferred to the creditor finally and conclusively by the execution of settlement or settlement of accounts to which the security right to the property belongs, the creditor shall evaluate it at an appropriate price, and appropriate the balance to the principal and interest of the secured claim, or if the appraised amount is less than the secured claim amount, it is possible to complete the settlement procedures by notifying the debtor of such fact and complete the settlement procedures by means of in writing, without any restriction (see Supreme Court Decision 2001.