The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The crime of taking property in breach of trust under Article 357 (1) of the Criminal Act is established where a person who administers another person's business obtains property or benefits in property in exchange for an illegal solicitation in connection with his/her duties. The crime of taking property in breach of trust under Article 357 (2) of the Criminal Act is established where the property or benefits under paragraph (1) are provided. The person who administers another

Even if a person, other than himself/herself, has another person acquire property or property benefits, it is clear that the crime is not established.

However, the other person acquired property or property benefits as the deceased or representative of the person who received the illegal solicitation, or the other person who received the illegal solicitation bears the living expenses, etc. of the other person.

In cases where a person who received an unlawful solicitation receives property or property benefits from another person or where such other person is exempted from expenditure as much as he/she received such property or property benefits due to circumstances such as the fact that he/she or he/she had borne an obligation against such other person, and where there exists a relationship that can be evaluated as being directly received by the person who received an illegal solicitation, such a crime may be established.

(2) The court below acquitted Defendant C of the charge of giving and receiving the loan of this case on the ground of its stated reasoning. The court below held that Defendant C’s receipt of the loan of this case constitutes a promotion committee of Defendant C with the substance as an organization. Thus, it is difficult to view it as a case where there is a relationship that Defendant C received the loan of this case as directly received by the promotion committee of this case under social norms and social norms, and thus, it is difficult to regard it as a case where Defendant C received the loan of this case as being directly received by Defendant C., among the facts charged against Defendant C, and the charge against Defendant C.

The reasoning of the judgment below is based on the above legal principles and records.