The judgment below

Of the guilty parts of the defendant A and the acquitted part, the disclosure of business secrets is caused.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A 1) The Defendant’s defense counsel asserts that, in the appellate brief, 125 of the daily list of crimes listed in the attached Form No. 2 (2) of the judgment below (hereinafter “instant No. 2 materials”) that Defendant A taken out by Defendant A by mistake of fact, the Defendant’s defense counsel did not constitute a major business asset. However, the Defendant’s defense counsel appears to be erroneous in the assertion as to the instant No. 2 materials.

No major business assets can be used, and there was no purpose to gain unjust profits or to inflict losses on E (hereinafter referred to as "victim company").

Therefore, Defendant A’s taking out of the instant No. 2 does not constitute a crime of occupational breach of trust.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to Defendant A (two years of suspended sentence in the month of imprisonment with prison labor) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) Fact misunderstanding (non-guilty part) (hereinafter “instant transmission data”) and two files sent by Defendant A to Defendant B (hereinafter “the instant transmission data”) on the list of crimes in attached Form 1 (i) and the list of crimes in attached Form 1 (hereinafter “the instant data”) indicated in the lower judgment constituted a business secret, all of which the damaged company made considerable efforts to keep confidential.

Therefore, the crime of violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act due to the acquisition and leakage of trade secrets against Defendant A is established, and the crime of violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act due to the acquisition and use of trade secrets against Defendant B is established, and Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) and D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) should also be punished in accordance with both punishment regulations.

2) The sentence imposed by the lower court to Defendant A, who was improper in sentencing, is too unhued and thus unfair.

2. Determination as to Defendant A’s assertion of mistake of facts

A. The crime of occupational breach of trust is established in a case where an employee of the relevant legal doctrine removes data without permission from a competitor company or its own intent to use for its own interest.