The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge of breach of trust is acquitted.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the court below's imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The ex officio defense counsel on the point of breach of trust (2019 order 1662) alleged the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the violation of trust after the lapse of the period for filing the appeal. However, the ex officio review is made.

A. On April 5, 2016, the summary of this part of the facts charged was that the Defendant purchased ENAS vehicles in the name of the Defendant’s wife at C Co., Ltd.’s office located in Suwon city, and entered into a contract to obtain loans of KRW 41.8 million from the victim F Co., Ltd. on the following grounds: (a) on April 7, 2016, the Defendant established a right to collateral security of KRW 20.9 million with the victim as the obligee; and (b) thus, there was a duty to keep the said vehicle in custody not to damage the security value of the said vehicle until the loan is repaid.

Nevertheless, on August 9, 2017, the Defendant provided the above vehicle as collateral to a creditor in the name-free statement on August 2017, with a total of KRW 18,464,530,000, and made it difficult for the victim company to exercise the right to collateral by preventing the location of the said vehicle from ascertaining the location of the said vehicle.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired financial benefits equivalent to KRW 15 million and suffered damages equivalent to KRW 20.9 million from the victim.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged on the premise that the Defendant was a person in charge of the F&A’s business.

C. On the other hand, the crime of breach of trust 1 is established when a person who administers another’s business obtains pecuniary advantage or causes a third party to do so through an act in violation of one’s duty and thereby causes damage to another person who is the subject of the business. Thus, the subject of the crime must be in the position of administering

Here, in order to be “a person who administers another’s business,” the whole or part of the business pertaining to the management of another’s property.