The judgment of the first instance shall be reversed.

The defendant shall publicly announce the summary of the judgment against the defendant not guilty.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

In order to become the subject of breach of trust due to mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, a certain scope of decision or independence in dealing with administrative affairs should be recognized. Since the Defendant only performed an auxiliary role in the process of being paid KRW 1 billion from the victim E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”) to the J (hereinafter “J”) to the victim Co., Ltd., the Defendant is a mechanical assistant without discretionary authority and thus, the independence in dealing with administrative affairs cannot be recognized.

In addition, in order to ask the defendant to commit the crime of breach of trust, the defendant should have been given the duty of fund execution of the victimized company or the duty of preventing damage, etc. However, the defendant only takes charge of the duty of fund execution as the head of the planning and coordination office of the victimized company, but did not take charge of fund execution duty.

On December 22, 2009, the non-existence of property damage company repaid the claim amounting to KRW 1 billion against J with the bonds with warrants equivalent to KRW 1.3 billion at par value. Thus, it cannot be deemed that the damage company caused property damage to the damaged company.

On July 3, 2009, J kept custody of KRW 1 billion received from the victimized company, and I proposed that the J acceptance should be returned to the victimized company as it is. The F-Chairperson requested L to purchase the shares of the victimized company as above KRW 1 billion. The F-Chairperson purchased the bonds with warrants of the Co., Ltd. with the balance of KRW 650 million upon the occurrence of the loss of KRW 350 million due to the purchase of the above shares.

Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the damage of the victimized company and the third party's profit acquisition (the person who acquired the profit in this case is the R& which sold the bonds with warrants and received cash) have occurred by the act of the F Vice-Chairperson.