The appeal is dismissed.

Examination of the Grounds of Appeal

1. In determining whether a manager had an intent to acquire intent or an unlawful acquisition in connection with a business judgment on the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 through 4, the strict interpretation criteria for the crime of breach of trust shall be maintained only in cases where it is acknowledged as an intentional act with the awareness that he/she or a third party would obtain property benefits and that it would inflict an intentional act with the awareness that he/she or the third party would inflict a loss on himself/herself, taking into account various circumstances, such as the developments and motive leading up to the business judgment in question, the content of the business subject to the determination, economic situation of the company, and the probability of incurring loss and obtaining profit, etc.

However, in light of the specific circumstances, such as the content and nature of the business performed in breach of trust, an act of breach of trust refers to any act that does not perform an act that is expected to be naturally required under the provisions of the law, the content of the contract, or the principle of trust and good faith, or an act that is anticipated not to perform as a matter of course. Whether an act constitutes an act of breach of trust shall be determined depending on the nature and content of the business, the specific roles and status of the office executor, and the specific circumstances at the time of the act, whether the act deviates from the ordinary scope of business in light of the principle of trust and good faith. As such, even if considering all the above circumstances as to the management judgment of the manager, it shall be done without performing an act that is expected to perform as a matter of course in the specific situation of the law, the content of the contract, or the principle of trust and good faith, or