Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 300,000 won.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the general responsibility for the redevelopment project of apartment, which is the residents of Daegu Suwon-gu C apartment, and the victim D is the residents of the above apartment.

On August 16, 2015, the Defendant received a sales contract No. 416 from the victim D and kept the C Apartment 416 at the Daegu Suwon-gu Office for Residents' Council.

9.5. Around the Daegu Suwon-gu C Apartment 114, “The sales contract of the C Apartment 416 No. 116 shall be immediately returned and changed,” which was requested by the injured party, rejected the return without any justifiable reason.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the defendant's legal statement;

1. Witnesses D and E's respective legal statements;

1. Application of some Acts and subordinate statutes to witness F's legal statement;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the assertion by the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The Defendant and the defense counsel asserts that “the Defendant did not keep the actual sales contract and did not have the status of the custodian because it was not the representative of residents.”

In the crime of embezzlement, “the custody of goods” means the state of de facto or legal control over the property, and the custody of the property should be based on the consignment relationship, as well as the need to be established by a contract such as loan of use, lease, delegation, etc., but may also be established by administrative management, customs, cooking, trust, etc.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do3840, Mar. 24, 2011). (B)

According to the evidence of the judgment, 1) If at least 85% of the C apartment 72 households consent with G Co., Ltd. from July 2015 to August 31, 2015, G purchases the entire apartment and implements a redevelopment project.

“The fact that the agreement was reached, ② Sale affairs related to the said agreement was promoted by H as the representative of residents, but the Defendant.