All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal on R-related occupational breach of trust (hereinafter “R”), the lower court determined as follows: (a) on the grounds stated in its reasoning, that the price of USD 4 per share, which the victim FF Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”; hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”) had the Plaintiff FF Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”) acquire theR shares by acting in collusion with Defendant A and C in violation of its duties, was higher than the appropriate value.

Accordingly, Defendant A and C made the victim F to acquire R's new shares by calculating the amount of USD 4 per share which has been appraised as higher than the reasonable price, and caused the Plaintiff F to purchase the R's stocks with the funds by acquiring the shares of USD 4 per share, thereby allowing the Defendant A to gain an unproperty profit equivalent to the difference between the appropriate market price of the R's stocks which are unlisted stocks and USD 6 million in the stock price, and causing the victim F to incur an unproperty loss equivalent to the corresponding value. In this part of the facts charged, Defendant A and C convicted the Defendant of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Misappropriation) (hereinafter "Special Economic Crimes Act"), and acquitted the Defendant on the grounds that the violation of the Specific Economic Crimes Act (Misappropriation) (hereinafter "Special Economic Crimes Act").

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is justifiable.

There is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the act of breach of trust in breach of duty, subject of benefit, valuation of unlisted stocks, property damage, intent and business judgment rule of breach of trust, degree of proof necessary for conviction, and trial and judgment of appellate court as an ex post facto judgment, etc., as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal.

2. As to the grounds of appeal on the violation of the Specific Economic Crimes Act (Misappropriation), the lower court (Defendant A and C) shall act in collusion with Defendant A and C for the reasons indicated in its reasoning.