The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The Defendant, who was the representative of D from September 2010 to January 26, 2012, was delegated by the victim E with the authority to claim and settle equipment rental contracts and rental costs at the site of a electric housing complex construction work performed by the victim E, who was the representative of D in the wife population C from September 2010 to January 26, 2012.

Around November 3, 2010, the Defendant entered into a contract for the lease of equipment with F, a lessor of equipment, and the equipment from November 3, 2010 to November 30, 201 of the same month to December of the following month to lease KRW 10,000 per hour for the construction of a G electric source housing complex. From November 3, 2010 to December of the following month, the Defendant leased and used the equipment at the site of the construction of the said electric source housing complex.

On December 10, 2010, the Defendant received from the victim and the victim’s site manager, the amount of KRW 20 million under the name of the rent for equipment for November, 201, and KRW 10 million under the same name on the 31st day of the same month from the Defendant’s foreign exchange bank under the name of the Defendant, and embezzled the amount of KRW 9,350,000 for the victim for his/her personal purpose without paying it to F, and then arbitrarily consumed it for his/her personal purpose.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged as a result of the judgment, the Defendant claimed for the cost of equipment from October 2010 to H, and the Defendant paid the outstanding amount to H, not all the cost of equipment, and accordingly, it cannot be deemed that the amount the Defendant received was paid as equipment cost on December 10, 2010 and December 31, 2010; the Defendant reduced and paid KRW 4 million out of the amount the Defendant claimed in the course of settlement by the Defendant and E; the Defendant paid the rent of other equipment in the instant case against the existence of a transaction list. However, there is no transaction list as to the rent of 10 LC searcher equipment in the instant case.