B. 5g “Etofen prox work standard goods (hereinafter “the instant work standard goods”)” of the victim D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”) cannot be obtained if they are not open to many and unspecified persons and they are not through holders. In order to secure the instant work standard goods, it is necessary to purchase Etofen prox, which is technical concentrates, or to conduct joint research, presentation, comparison, etc. with other companies possessing the instant work standard goods. Thus, the instant work standard goods constitute a major business asset of the victim company, and the Defendant, who is an employee of the victim company, delivers the instant work standard goods to C without consent of the victim company, and distributed them out to the outside constitutes a crime of occupational breach of trust.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment by rendering a not guilty verdict of the facts charged in this case.

Judgment

The court below held that H, who serves as an employee of the victim company, was removed from part of the Etofen prox technical concentrates of this case without processing, and if an employee is not required to make any effort in acquiring them from the victim company, the court below may record and obtain them in a book without any separate approval.

While working from July 2008 to November 201, 201, the victim company did not purchase EtoFenx technical concentrates from the victim company and did not produce products in which the above technical concentrates were entered.

The statement to the effect that “” is stated, ② the Gindo stated by an investigative agency on behalf of the victim company as “not having taken any technology or effort to create the instant work standard goods,” ③ pesticide manufacturers share mutually standard work goods while conducting joint research announcements, and the Defendant was held around October 2004 by the victim company.