The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the Defendants is publicly announced.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that Defendant A leased and operated a large part of the business from the victimized company, and there was no fact that the Defendants violated their duties and caused damage to the victimized company.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged of this case is that Defendant A worked as a large assistant manager of Victim D Co., Ltd. (the trade name was changed to E; hereinafter “victim”) from the beginning of November 2005 to December 30, 207. Defendant B is a managing director of the victimized Co., Ltd., and Defendant B is a person who actually runs the victimized Co., Ltd. with the lead of major decision-making, such as the management of employees and fund management, and two persons are in the post-high school relationship and F is an employee in charge of the accounting affairs of the victimized Co., Ltd.

Defendant

A and Defendant B, the representative of the victimized Company around November 5, 2005, enter the damaged Company as a whole with efficient management, reduces the company's liabilities to more than 10% per year based on the details of the property evaluation as of April 30, 2005, and the amount of credit on various parts of credit and the amount of credit incurred later are entirely liable to the financial guarantor.

“To prepare a financial guarantee for delegation of the management of the small president system,” and promised to operate the damaged company in good faith.

Therefore, Defendant A and Defendant B are guarantors who prepared the financial guarantee as above, and Defendant A as a large assistant manager of the victimized Company, Defendant B as the actual operator of the victimized Company, and Defendant B should not incur damage to the assets of the victimized Company.

Nevertheless, the Defendants and F conspired in violation of their duties and saved costs by directly purchasing parts from H by the victimized company, but Defendant A started to work for the victimized company. After the commencement of the work for the victimized company, the Defendants and F purchased the parts under the name of Defendant A from the “I Company,” a company established under the name of Defendant A, and then 15% profits.