The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (based on factual errors or misapprehension of legal principles) made it difficult for the victim company to exercise the right of prosecution by transferring the vehicle created by the right to collateral security to E by means of collateral security, and the crime of breach of trust is established against the defendant.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below acquitted the defendant, and there is an error of misconception of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

2. Around December 2010, the summary of the facts charged: (a) the Defendant purchased D personal transport vehicles under C’s name; (b) borrowed KRW 30 million from the Llomon Savings Bank from the victim (the victim) Solomon Savings Bank to pay KRW 1,646,650 per month for 24 months to cover the purchase price of the vehicle; and (c) registered as a collateral security establishment for the said vehicle with the mortgagee’s interest at KRW 30 million for the victim and the bond value at KRW 30 million; and (d) the Defendant had the duty to keep the said vehicle until the loan is repaid.

Nevertheless, on December 31, 201, the Defendant borrowed KRW 10 million from E from E to transfer it as security at a place of the Government-Si, and thereby acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 10 million borrowed from E, and suffered damage equivalent to KRW 30 million to the principal and interest of the loan to the victim.

3. The lower court’s judgment: (a) although the Defendant was going through F, the Defendant was clearly aware of the identity and contact point of E, the other party who provided the instant vehicle as collateral with money, and (b) the Defendant continuously discussed the repayment of the obligation and the return of the vehicle through telephone conversations; (c) the Defendant was paying interest for the first few months to E; and (d) the Defendant did not provide E, while offering the instant vehicle as collateral, documents that can be used for the transfer or acquisition of the vehicle to E, such as a letter of waiver of the vehicle.