The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts and legal principles) was that the Defendant was obligated to use the amount of KRW 150 million,00,000,000,000,000, which was paid by the injured party pursuant to the management consignment contract concluded with the injured party, for the operation of the Nitice Center and, in particular, for the payment of the deposit for lease that was agreed to vest in the ownership of the injured party, the lessor was not paid the monthly forest road without paying KRW 30,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000).

As a result, the victim had no choice but to enter into a new lease agreement with the lessor by paying the lease deposit of KRW 70 million. Therefore, the victim suffered property damage equivalent to the above deposit, and the defendant obtained property profit equivalent to the same amount.

Therefore, breach of trust is established.

Nevertheless, the defendant had the intention of breach of trust at the time, or the defendant committed the act of breach of trust.

The judgment of the court below that acquitted the charged facts of this case on the ground that it is difficult to see it is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

2. Determination

A. On March 11, 2016, the Defendant invested KRW 150 million in the victim E and the victim (E) in Jin-gu, Busan on or around March 11, 2016, in the Defendant. The Defendant, on behalf of the victim, establishes a fee center and operates it for three months on behalf of the victim, and transfers it to the victim again after three months.

The lease deposit and premium, etc. for a store shall be owned by the victim of the investor.

'Formulate a management entrustment contract with the content of the contract.

Accordingly, on March 10, 2016, the victim KRW 10 million around March 10, 2016;

3.11. Minority KRW 90 million;

3. 17.50 million won each under the name of the defendant.