All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal in this case is that the data recorded in the facts charged are maintained as confidential by considerable effort of the victim company, and thus constitutes trade secrets as referred to in the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act, and the act of taking them out constitutes a major business asset to the extent that competition gains from competitors, and constitutes a violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act (the divulgence of trade secrets) and a crime of occupational breach of trust.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the facts charged of this case is erroneous, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The judgment of the court below

A. The lower court determined as to the violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act (Leakage of trade secrets, etc.). In light of the following: (a) the measures such as a separate account and password input system for U installation and access to data are deemed to have been taken after the withdrawal of the Defendants; (b) the Defendants did not have any confidential indication of the data of this case; and (c) the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone was that the data of this case were kept confidential by considerable effort.

In the end, it is difficult to view the above materials as constituting business secrets under the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act, and the court acquitted the above materials on the ground that they cannot be seen as business secrets.

B. The judgment of the court below on the charge of occupational breach of trust shall not be deemed to have carried out considerable time or cost in the case of each estimate as stated in the list 1 through 6 of the crimes committed in the separate sheet.