The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The main point of the prosecutor's appeal reasons (misunderstanding the facts) of the defendant and the injured person agreed to purchase the right to sell the land for living countermeasures and to newly build and sell the neighboring living facilities at the expense of the victim. As a result, G union established with the defendant and the injured person's purchase of 23 purchase right to sell the land at the expense of the victim. Since G union established with the total of 46 purchase right with the funds of the defendant and the injured person as basic property acquired the land from E and paid the down payment and the operating expenses

Even if the victim is not a member of the G Union, the Defendant and the victim concluded a partnership agreement to conduct the joint business as above. Accordingly, there is a de facto fiduciary relationship between the Defendant and the victim.

Therefore, the Defendant is the head of a G Union or a person who administers another’s business, the subject of breach of trust, because the Defendant is obligated to manage the victim’s property according to a partnership agreement with the victim.

Since the Defendant unilaterally returned the funds to the victim and distributed the shares of JJ, a corporation established to carry out the said business, even though the limitation of the business operation with the victim was not terminated, the Defendant’s intent of breach of trust may be recognized.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment by rendering a not guilty verdict of the facts charged in this case.

Judgment

A. In light of the following circumstances that can be acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court is difficult to view that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone constitutes “a person who administers another’s business” in which the Defendant should manage or protect the D’s property in relation to D, and it is difficult to recognize the Defendant’s intention of breach of trust.

The decision was determined.

(1) The F Housing Construction shall be followed.