All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B’s duty of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is included in the duties that can reasonably be expected to be in charge in the future, but it must be satisfied that Defendant B actually takes charge of the duties related to solicitation in the future. However, Defendant B was in charge of design and other duties at AY U.S. military units located at the time of receiving the instant entertainment, but was under charge of design and other duties at AY military units, and Defendant B did not receive or proceed with the relevant construction until the retirement was made. Ultimately, Defendant B did not actually perform the pertinent duties in relation to M with the illegal solicitation, and thus, was not in charge of the pertinent duties reasonably expected to be in the future. Accordingly, in this case, Defendant B did not actually perform the pertinent duties in the future, and thus, the crime of taking a breach of trust is not established. 2) In light of the fact that unfair sentencing is not directly related to Defendant B’s business, Defendant B did not perform the relevant duties in violation of the provisions of the military unit, the lower court’s sentence (a prison sentence of imprisonment, year 1, year 80 hours, and additional collection).

B. Defendant C1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, Defendant C (hereinafter “Defendant C1”) was on duty as a supervisor of construction in the technical project department of the facility engineering unit located in the facility engineering unit located in the AZ, and retired from the instant case. M was intended to perform an act related to BA, and the relevant work was not conducted at all. Moreover, the construction contract owner and design change of the US military unit are irrelevant to the work of the construction supervisor. Moreover, Defendant C was not in a position to affect the construction owner, and there was no illegal solicitation from M and there was no convenience in the actual M. 2) in light of the circumstances leading up to the illegal sentencing of Defendant C to the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s imprisonment with labor for six months.