All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Regarding the violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act, Defendant A’s drawings prepared by G Co., Ltd. (formerly “F Co., Ltd.”; hereinafter “F Co., Ltd.”) and the similarity of pages of victim N Co., Ltd. (O; hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”) and partial number of pages was modified, but the former Maritime Marina processing drawings and surface drawings, which can be deemed as core technology, are equally indicated. The date of preparation of the relevant drawings, are around November 201, when Defendant A entered F Co., Ltd., and the Defendants’ response at the time of the commencement of investigation into Defendant F Co., Ltd., Ltd., the fact that Defendant A leaked from No. 141 to No. 1400, Oct. 14, 201, when Defendant A entered the F Co., Ltd., and the Defendants’ response was sufficiently acknowledged.

In addition, because the drawings disclosed on the Internet, etc. do not contain some parts and figures, these materials alone cannot produce the damaged company's V sub-pact, and in the case of the sub-pact of the sub-pact of the sub-pact of the sub-pact or the sub-pact of the sub-pact of the sub-pact of the sub-pact and the sub-pact of the sub-pact of the sub-pact of the sub-pact of the sub-pact of the sub

Since the shape or measurement of the parts of the sub-sections of the Hearn and the Lannntain are those requiring precision processing, it is created through a large number of errors in execution, the economic value of the damaged company also is recognized. Since the damaged company receives a written confidentiality pledge from its employees and takes sufficient measures to maintain confidentiality, such as managing the relevant materials using a security program, etc., it can be recognized that confidentiality is also recognized.

Therefore, each data of crime list 1 is to protect unfair competition prevention and trade secrets.