Defendants are not guilty. The summary of this judgment is publicly announced.

The summary of the facts charged is that Defendant A is the president of the “D Association” under the title “D Association” managing 14 lots of land, such as macro-si C, etc. (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant land”) from around 2003, and Defendant B is the general affairs of the said D Association.

Defendant

A’s sole criminal administration Defendant A was delegated by 81 co-owners, such as victims E, from among 126 co-owners sharing the instant land.

Accordingly, on November 21, 201, the Defendant prepared an agreement to sell the instant land to the Agricultural PartnershipF (hereinafter “F”), and, on the pretext of a sales contract, deposited KRW 200 million on the same day with the agricultural bank account in the name of the Defendant A, and KRW 397,357,723 of the said 81 co-owners’ shares in 391/492, among them, deposited KRW 81 co-owners for the said 78 co-owners.

In this process, the Defendant embezzled KRW 25,570,00 out of the above sales contract amount to eight co-owners, including co-owners B, on July 5, 2012, and embezzled KRW 17,982,154 equivalent to the ratio of 73 victims, who did not consent to the purchase of a car by arbitrarily using it as the purchase price for a car in Gland, and then did not consent to the purchase of a car.

The Defendants, as described in paragraph (1), had been in custody of KRW 397,357,723 for the co-owners of 81, as described in paragraph (1), in an opportunity to use some of them as the housing construction cost of Defendant B, and conspired to use them as the housing construction cost of Defendant B. On December 10, 2012, the Defendants agreed only seven co-owners, including co-owners H on December 10, 2012, but transferred KRW 30 million out of the above sales contract amount to the agricultural bank account under Defendant B’s name, and embezzled KRW 73 victims’ share of 746/492 who did not consent to the use of the housing construction cost by arbitrarily using it as the housing construction cost of Defendant B.

Judgment

According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the following facts are recognized:

Defendants and I, H, and H.