Defendants are not guilty

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

B From February 2010, the Gangnam-gu Seoul E building office (hereinafter referred to as the “instant office”) was leased from the owner of the building to KRW 50 million, monthly rent of KRW 4020,000 from KRW 60,000,000, and Defendant A was an employee of (ju)G.

On January 31, 201, the Defendants concluded a sublease contract to sublease the office of this case to the victim H, and set the deposit and monthly rent to the same extent as the original lease contract. However, the Defendants, on December 31, 2010, agreed to pay the deposit and rent later due to the victim’s financial situation, instead of having agreed to pay the deposit and rent later, was partly unpaid to the building owner.

On August 14, 2011, in relation to the above sub-lease contract as of August 201, the Defendants determined that the sum of the amount the Defendants would receive from the injured party in relation to the above sub-lease contract was the sum of KRW 104,156,00 and KRW 24,156,00 and KRW 30,00 of the acquisition cost (hereinafter referred to as "office usage fee") such as premium and house for six months in which the amount the Defendants would receive from the injured party was set off as of August 14, 201 (the investigation record 6,29 pages), and the monthly rent for the pushed six months was set off by March and August 8, 201.

According to the above agreement, the Defendants received 50 million won from the person who suffered damage on September 9, 201 to a new bank account in the name of A as sublease deposit, and transferred 35 million won to a national bank account in the name of A with the price for the house of office around September 15, 201.

The above sub-lease contract is based on the premise that the original lease contract remains effective, and the Defendants did not notify the owner of the building of the important fact that the deposit was almost low on the wind that is deducted from the deposit because they did not pay a rent from the end of the end of 2010, and even if they received KRW 85 million, they shall be used for other purposes, such as prompt repayment of debt by the Defendants.