All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Judgment on the Defendants’ grounds of appeal

A. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court and the first instance court, it is justifiable to maintain the first instance judgment to the same effect that the content of the instant definition is not known to the public, and it is an independent economic value, and is maintained as confidential by considerable effort of the victimized company, and thus, it constitutes not only trade secrets under the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act but also a major business asset subject to occupational breach of trust. In so doing, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on trade secrets or major business assets beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules.

B. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment and the reasoning of the first instance judgment maintained by the lower court in light of the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court and the first instance court, the lower court is justifiable to have maintained the first instance judgment to the same effect that Defendant A conspired with Defendant B to commit a crime of this case’s justice on the grounds of various circumstances as indicated in its reasoning, and there was no error of misapprehending the legal doctrine on the requirements for establishment of a joint principal offender by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of

2. Examining the judgment of the court below and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance maintained by the court below in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below and the court of first instance, the exceptional processing code of the victimized company does not constitute trade secrets or major business assets, and thus, the exceptional processing code among the facts charged against Defendant B is considered as not constituting trade secrets or major business assets.