All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, and unreasonable sentencing)

A. Although there are the following reasons, the judgment of the court of first instance which convicted the Defendants of occupational breach of trust, theft, and violation of the Trademark Act, there is an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles in the judgment of the court of first instance which convicted the Defendants.

1) Occupational Breach of Trust (Defendant A, B, and C) (1) The Defendant G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim”).

2) Defendant C did not actively participate in Defendant A and B’s act of breach of trust or trademark violation, and Defendant C did not have any intention in breach of trust, since it did not deduct the information of the damaged company from the technology developed by C. The damaged company did not have any damage to the damaged company. ④ The materials listed in the separate list of crimes listed in the judgment of the court of first instance are not important business assets, and the damaged company was not strictly managed the inside of the company at the time of the Defendants’ work. (2) The materials prepared and kept by the Defendants were stolen (Defendant A and B) (hereinafter “Defendant A and B”), (2) the documents prepared and kept by the Defendants, which were stored in North Korea after their retirement, and (3) the documents issued by Defendant A and the documents issued by Defendant A and the documents issued by Defendant A were not subject to larceny.

3) Violation of the Trademark Act (the trademark attached by the defendant's R and the defendant's trademark attached to the damaged company is not similar, and the trademark of the victimized company was attached and used at the request of the AP owner of the trademark right to Mexico after receiving an order of the AP as to BY of Mexico.