The Defendant is a director of CG from February 1, 2013 to July 29, 2013, and from June 2015 to June 2015, the Defendant was duly authorized to comprehensively delegate his/her authority to agree on and pay compensation for business operations, etc. to be received by CG from the victim company and to have legitimate access to the said account.

I would like to say.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the facts and affecting the judgment.

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant’s assertion is rejected, on the ground that the Defendant, without permission, inputs the ID and its password into the web master account of the victim company, intrudes upon another’s information and communications network without due access, and sufficiently recognized the fact of infringing another’s secret by downloading file related to the victim company’s business affairs.

(1) The data that the Defendant received through the access and download of the access and download to the web posters account of the victim company is very important in the victim company, such as the patent to make a bridge and the important drawings related to construction, files and videos related to work schedule, video, personal information, etc.

② When constructing bridges, a victim company had patent rights to strawer, which is a structure supporting the upper board, and eV operated by Defendant EV.

CG concluded an agreement on the business and execution with the victim company, and performed design business and construction in the area south by utilizing the above patent right from around 2003 to January 2013.

For the convenience of duties, the employees of the victim company shall be employees in charge of CG.