The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court rendered a not guilty verdict of the charges concerning the receipt of breach of trust even though the Defendant may be deemed to have received an illegal solicitation from U.S., or erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentencing of the lower court on the grounds that the sentencing of an unreasonable sentencing (a fine of KRW 10 million) is too unjustifiable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. From March 2009 to October 201, the summary of the facts charged regarding the receipt of property in breach of trust, the Defendant: (a) as the E-site manager at the construction site of the instant construction site, the Defendant was engaged in the performance of the said construction; (b) management of subcontracted construction companies; (c) determination of the progress payment amount to be paid to subcontracted construction companies; (d) evaluation of the performance of subcontracted construction; and (e) management of various subcontracting contracts and processes related to construction; and (e) payment of the construction cost to the subcontractor; (b) payment of the construction cost to the subcontractor was required for the subcontractor; (c) the subcontractor and the Defendant, around January 1, 201, received from the subcontractor’s office at the construction site of the instant construction site of the instant construction site of the instant construction site of the instant construction site of the instant construction site of the instant construction site of the instant construction site of the construction site of the instant construction site of the instant construction site of the construction site of the instant construction site of the Corporation of the instant construction site of the instant construction site of the instant construction site of the construction site of the construction site of the instant construction site.

On February 2, 2010, the Defendant prepared a sum of approximately KRW 250,00,000 for food expenses in the above brin restaurant by allocating and deducting food expenses from the wages that E directly pays to workers at the site of the subcontractor in the above construction site office, and paid it to the above U.S.

On April 9, 2010, the Defendant paid food expenses to the above Haba-cafeteria around April 9, 201, the construction site from the above U.S.