Among the parts against Defendant B and E, and all guilty parts against Defendant A and C shall be reversed, and this part shall be reversed.

1. As to the criteria for determining whether property damage occurs in the crime of breach of trust, the crime of breach of trust is established when a person who administers another’s business obtains pecuniary profit or has a third party obtain such profit through an act in violation of one’s duty and thereby inflict loss on the principal. In this case, the term “act in violation of one’s duty” includes any act in violation of a fiduciary relationship with the principal by failing to perform an act naturally expected under the provisions of law, the terms of a contract, or the good faith principle, or by doing an act expected not to perform as a matter of course, in light of specific circumstances, such as the content and nature of the business, etc., and includes not only cases where the “where property damage occurs” but also cases where the risk of actual property damage arises (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1149, Oct. 28, 2010). The lower court determined that the act in violation of the loan regulations requires not only the act in violation of one’s duty but also the act in violation of the loan regulations that may be justified.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the above legal principles, we affirm the above judgment of the court below as just.