For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court convicted the Defendants of the facts charged (excluding the part of innocence and the part of innocence).

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules without exhaust all necessary deliberations, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment of “trade secret”, “business breach of trust”, “major assets in business”, and “joint principal properties” in the crime of violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act.

In addition, the argument that the lower court erred in mistake of facts regarding sentencing constitutes an argument of unfair sentencing.

However, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, and an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the Defendants, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.