The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of eight million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the Defendants.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Paragraph (1) of the crime of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (the part on voluntary use of corporate credit cards) in the judgment of misunderstanding of facts, the Defendants managed F with D’s maintenance business by management judgment, and used a corporate card or lent funds under the supervision of the Defendants in order to support its activities. Therefore, the intent of breach of trust cannot be recognized.

The judgment below

On the other hand, 10 million won out of Nos. 3 2, 12,00,000 won is erroneously remitted to accounting personnel and immediately returned. Thus, the scope of occupational breach of trust can not be included in the scope of occupational breach of trust.

According to the facts stated in the judgment, Paragraph 2 (Registration for Lease) F has leased part of D.

F deposited KRW 70,000,000,000,000 out of the increase in lease deposit, into the D account, and the remainder of KRW 154,000,000 has been assumed by D, and therefore there is no damage to D.

However, even if it is not so, the judgment that the lease contract is null and void for the above lease deposit of KRW 620,000,000, there is no damage D.

In the judgment of the court, Paragraph 3 of the crime No. 3 (the part of the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage) the defendants have the provisional money against D.

The Defendants borrowed money from D to M to receive a return of the provisional payment from D and set up a collateral on the real estate owned by D. The amount borrowed from M was deposited into D accounts, and paid to the Defendants for the return of the provisional payment, there is no procedural problem and there is no damage in D.

The punishment sentenced by the court below of unfair sentencing (the fine of KRW 10 million) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In light of specific circumstances such as the content and nature of the business of dealing with the crime of breach of trust, the act of breach of trust as referred to in the crime of breach of trust in the judgment of the court shall be an act that is expected not to perform as a matter of course or not to perform as a matter of course under the provisions of the law, the content of the contract