1. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment on the Defendant’s ground of appeal, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment that held that the crime of occupational breach of trust is established on the ground that: (a) the Defendant, the representative director of D (hereinafter “D”) was able to be supplied with the cream components at a reasonable price from directly Co., Ltd. E (hereinafter “E”) and caused damage to D by intervening in F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) to be provided with the cream components at a price higher than the reasonable price; and (b) thereby causing damage to D property at a higher price than the reasonable price.

Furthermore, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the deduction on the ground that F did not regard the remainder after deducting operating expenses incurred by F in relation to the performance of the above duties during the above period as damages, on the grounds that F actually performed the duty of purchasing materials, managing materials, product management, and logistics management of the victimized company while it supplied the victimized company, and thus, it is difficult to deem that the victimized company is liable to pay F the price for the performance of duties to F, and as to the portion equivalent to the legitimate price, damage to the victimized company is not caused to the victimized company. However, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the deduction on the above grounds that F did not regard payment fees and interest expenses, benefits and retirement

In light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the above determination by the court below is acceptable. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on

2. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor, the lower court concerning the original chip part of the instant facts charged.