The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) only applied the discount rate that was approved or consented by the victim company, and did not sell medicines at will by applying the discount rate as stated in the judgment below, and did not intend to cause damage to the victim company.

Even if there was no explicit consent of the victim company, the victim company entered into a formal contract with the defendant even though the defendant had been aware that the defendant had inflicted damage on the victim company by arbitrarily applying the discount rate, which subsequently consented to the application of the discretionary discount rate. After that, the victim company proposed that the defendant set off the commission fee to be received by the victim company from the victim company and the loss inflicted on the part of the victim company. In conclusion, the victim company consented to the application of the discount rate of the defendant, and therefore, the crime of breach of trust is not established against the defendant.

2. Determination

A. Considering the difference between the original court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of the testimony made by the witness in light of the contents of the original judgment and the evidence duly examined in the original judgment, the lower court clearly erred in its determination on the credibility of the testimony made by the witness in light of the substance of the original judgment and the evidence duly examined in the original judgment.

Unless there are extenuating circumstances to see the credibility of a statement made by a witness in the original court or in full view of the results of the examination of evidence at the original court and the results of the further examination of evidence conducted until the closing of oral argument at the appellate court, the appellate court shall not reverse without permission the judgment of the original court on the sole ground that the judgment of the original court on the credibility of a statement made by a witness in the original court is different from the judgment of the appellate court (Supreme Court Decision 2006 November 24, 2006).