업무상배임등
All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants and Defendant A are dismissed.
1. Summary of the grounds for appeal 1) Defendant A’s mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, and Defendant A did not have an intention of breach of trust.
② The attached list of crimes (1) No. 2 (amount of gold), No. 3, 5, 13, and 14 per annum and the previous data (2) of the list of crimes (hereinafter referred to as “data of the list of crimes committed on the guilty portion”) of the lower judgment are not an important business asset.
(2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.
2) A prosecutor (1) misunderstanding the facts (with respect to all the Defendants) (1). As to the part concerning the part concerning “instant charge” column 1-A of the judgment below’s acquittal, the part excluding Nos. 2 (amount of gold), 3, 5, 13, and 14 from among the materials re-written in the crime list (1) attached to the judgment of the court below (hereinafter “data on the list of crimes committed in the part of innocence”) constitutes an important business asset.
(2) The non-guilty part of the lower judgment’s judgment’s “this part of the facts charged” refers to the business secrets of “MPI-Nic questioning reply - 12030.pdf” files and “E-Bridige-120420.pdf” files with respect to Section 1-B.
(3) The part not guilty of the lower judgment’s judgment on the part of paragraphs (c) and (2) through (5) of Articles 1-3 and 1-2 through (5) constitutes a trade secret separate from the prior patent, which is separate from that of the victim company’s vertical pro-type cards b, pro-ray film b, and appropriate holes size, etc., by notifying Defendant A to C by Defendant A.
(2) Improper sentencing (for Defendant A, the sentence imposed by the lower court) is too uneasible and unfair.
2. Determination 1) The Defendant made the same assertion as the Defendant alleged in the lower judgment regarding the misapprehension of the facts and legal doctrine of Defendant A.
The court below rejected the assertion on the assertion in detail under the title “whether Defendant A’s breach of trust is intentional or not, and whether it is an important business asset.”
Examining the lower judgment in comparison with the record, Defendant A’s breach of trust.