All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

A. Defendant 1) In light of the fact-misunderstanding or misapprehension of legal principles as to whether the Defendant had intention or purpose to commit an act of violating the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act (a divulgence, etc. of trade secrets), the determination should be made on the basis of the around January 22, 2014, which was delivered by the Defendant from G, and the lower court, took into account the following circumstances together after the Defendant received the said file and carried it out to the outside, and the Defendant demanded only data of annual sales in 2012 and 2013, monthly sales in 2013, and ordinary profits, even though G demanded only data to the extent that the said file was delivered, there was no intention or unjust profit to obtain trade secrets or damage a trade secrets owner.

In addition, in light of the fact that the defendant's seals and seals on the business confidentiality pledge at the time of entry cannot be deemed to have imposed a specific obligation to keep confidentiality on the defendant, that there is no indication of confidentiality on the above file, that D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "D") did not separately manage the security level according to the data, that there is no technical security device to prevent the release of the above file from being carried out by "self-approval" without the consent of another person, and that there is no technical device to prevent the transmission of the file to the individual mail after the cancellation of the code, that there is no technical device to prevent the removal of the file from being carried out to the outside, and that separate security education has not been carried out to the employees, the data of the above file was not maintained and managed as confidential by considerable effort of D, and thus, it does not constitute business secrets.

Nevertheless, the court below held that the above file constitutes a trade secret and that there was a purpose to obtain the defendant's intentional or unjust profit from the acquisition of trade secrets, or to inflict damage on the person holding trade secrets.

The judgment of the court below is erroneous.