All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

A. The instant trademark use agreement is merely a non-exclusive license agreement, and merely manages employees and existing member stores of F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”) by temporary consignment of management (hereinafter “O”) and thus, the above trademark use agreement constitutes transfer of business.

(2) shall not be deemed to constitute domestic business transfer.

Even if the above contract was concluded, the accumulated deficit of the victim company did not cause damage to the victim company. Since there was no benefit from the defendant orO, the crime of breach of trust cannot be established, and the defendant did not have any awareness as to whether the special resolution of the general meeting of shareholders is necessary, the intent of breach of trust cannot be recognized.

(b) The prosecutor (unfairness) of the lower court’s sentence (two months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unreasonable;

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, ① since occupational breach of trust is an abstract dangerous crime, so there is a risk of damage and there is no actual damage, so long as the non-exclusive license of the K trademark having the property value as the most important asset of the victim company belongs to theO, and the existing franchise franchise store also changes into the O's membership store and the O has the management authority over the franchise store, it cannot be readily concluded that there is no damage to the victim company. ②O can expect an intangible positive effect on the "U" which is the existing franchise of the victim company by acquiring the management authority over the existing franchise store of the victim company with the use of the K trademark and the use of the K trademark, and Q Q, the representative of the O, is carrying on the franchise business.