The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants are not guilty.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and legal principles 1) Defendant A (A) or a specific defendant under the same paragraph or the specific defendant under the same paragraph or paragraph (a) refers to only the name of the defendant, without omitting his/her name, where the name is again referred within the parallel of the same paragraph or the name is omitted.

The facts charged that Defendant B reviewed and consulted on the draft of the instant project proposal, etc. from N, because the instant report cannot be deemed as a major asset for business use of the victim K Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim”). Furthermore, the Defendant did not receive the draft of the project proposal from N, Inc. (hereinafter “N”), a competitor company, and thus, the Defendant did not receive the draft of the project proposal from N and received the draft of the project proposal from N and received the draft of the instant project proposal, etc., and thus, the Defendant did not understand the Defendant’s assertion on this part of the facts charged by considering the overall purport of the Defendant’s assertion.

Defendant’s act in violation of his occupational duty;

shall not be deemed to exist.

On the grounds of appeal, the Defendant asserts that, in addition to the Defendant’s act of breach of trust, the Defendant was indicted on the premise that he was also involved in the act of double preparation of Defendant D’s business proposal. However, upon examining the facts charged in the instant case in light of the Prosecutor’s written opinion on September 28, 2016, it is understood that the Defendant was prosecuted only for his occupational breach of trust.

[See Note 9) (b) although the evaluation scores of the project proposal of the victimized company that was prepared by M (hereinafter “M”) for the instant project by M Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “M”) were higher than the N’s evaluation scores for the N’s project proposal, the content of the project proposal is not any particular superior.