The defendant is innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged of this case was that the Defendant entered into a contract with H-BAM steel 400 tons at the victim I’s market price, which is a steel lessee, with H-BAM steel 400 billion won at the above construction site, with respect to the construction of Gwangju Ftel in Gwangju City, which was conducted in Gwangju City, on March 3, 2004, and used the Ha-BAM steel 400 billion won at the above construction site, for the purpose of tamping construction or supporting stand, and the owner’s failure to repair the above construction was stored for the victim and the creditors at the construction site, while removing the above steel, the collapse of adjoining land was anticipated, and H was not recovered for five years or more, and 1.5 million won at the above construction site; 2.5 million won at the same time, 1.5 million won at the above construction site; 2.5 million won at 1 million won at the price of the victim and the creditors at the construction site; 1.5 million won at the above construction site.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

2. First of all, the defendant cannot be deemed as the property owned by the victim and delegated the custody of the defendant.

In addition, even if the property of the facts charged is selected as steel, it should be judged as follows even if the property of the facts charged is considered as 115 million won.

In relation to whether the Defendant intentionally sold steel in embezzlement, it is insufficient to recognize that the sole evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone was that the Defendant disposed of steel with the intent of embezzlement or unlawful acquisition while the Defendant kept the steel owned by the victim for the victim, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

Rather, according to the records, the Defendant.