The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary and ex officio determination of the grounds for appeal by a prosecutor;

A. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual errors or misapprehension of the legal principle) was pronounced not guilty on the grounds that there is no proof of a crime regarding the facts charged in the instant case. However, the lower court rejected the victim’s employee F and E’s statement contrary to the Defendant’s statement without any justifiable reason and concluded that the Defendant was permitted to take out the instant TV, and that there was insufficient evidence to acknowledge the facts charged even though the Defendant did not perform a disposal act, such as having the Defendant keep the instant TV in custody to a third party, unlike other items, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby

B. B. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor ex officio, the prosecutor tried to examine the original facts charged at the trial, while maintaining the original facts charged as the primary facts charged, and applied for amendments to a bill of indictment adding the ancillary facts charged as stated in the facts charged at the trial. Since this court permitted this, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

However, even if there is a reason to reverse ex officio as above, the reason for appeal against the primary facts charged by the prosecutor is still subject to the judgment of this court.

2. Judgment on the primary facts charged

A. Around February 2012, the Defendant: (a) opened a door of underground in which the victim’s employees E receive keys from the victim’s employees E for cleaning while negotiating the purchase of underground streets owned by the victim C Co., Ltd. and the Gangseo-si, Gangnam-si; and (b) cut off the said door with the victim’s share of KRW 600,000,000 in total of KRW 3.6 million in the market price owned by the victim.

B. As to the above facts charged, the lower court determined the Defendant.