1. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant A, C, and E

A. As to the crime related to KRW 690 million loan, the lower court determined that the Defendant E was aware of the fact that the trading price of the AT forest loan offered as security for KRW 690,000,000 was 70,000,000,000,000 won, and that Defendant E was aware of the fact that the above loan was damaged by the victim, and that there was a risk of damage to the victim.

Furthermore, for reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court recognized the total amount of KRW 690 million as damages caused by the Defendants’ occupational breach of trust by disregarding the relevant provisions by Defendant A and E.

Examining the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment of breach of trust and the calculation of the amount of profit, or by failing to

B. As to the crime related to KRW 1.29 billion, the lower court determined that the above loan constitutes an act of breach of trust, inasmuch as Defendant A, C, and E loaned KRW 1.29 billion as it was clearly in violation of the internal regulations of the victim and measures such as securing sufficient collateral to recover the loan have not been taken, on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

In addition, the court below determined that the above loans were mainly made for the benefit of the victim, and that even if the above Defendants knew of the violation of the internal regulations, the intent of occupational breach of trust is recognized, and that the damage was not caused to the victim.

related.