A. Of the facts charged in the instant case claiming a mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, each occupational breach of trust against E High Schools and FF High Schools among the facts charged in the instant case. ① In the case of facility lease contract, the right not to renew the contract upon the expiration of the two-year term of lease is imposed on the installation company at the time of the termination of the maintenance, repair, and lease contract. However, the standard construction contract concluded by the Defendant under a private contract bears the total amount of the installation cost of the facilities at the school and imposes an burden on the school. The Defendant’s arbitrary transfer of the sales claim of KFF to EFFI to EFI, a specialized debt collection agency, to increase the burden on the school. As such, there is a risk of property damage on the side of the school. ② The Defendant is sufficiently recognized as a person in charge of the administrative affairs of each school as the head of E and FF High School. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged, misapprehending the legal principles on the occurrence of damages in the course of occupational breach of trust and the status of the manager of property.

B. Considering the background leading up to the fabrication of private documents and the commission of the event thereof, and the amount of damages inflicted on school juristic persons Dental Institute, the lower court’s sentence (two years of suspended execution in August) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment of the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal on whether to change the scope of the trial, the part of the charge of occupational breach of trust concerning the Ehigh school which was found not guilty by the court below among the charges of this case, which was “to obtain property benefits equivalent to KRW 237,831,00,” and the part of the charge of occupational breach of trust concerning Ehigh school which was found not guilty by the court below, shall be deemed to have obtained property benefits equivalent to the same amount,