1. The part of the judgment of the court below against the defendant A is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

A misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles did not inflict property damage on R Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “R”) by resolving excessive operating allowances to B, and thus, the crime of breach of trust was not established, and there was no intention to commit a crime of breach of trust against the defendant.

The imprisonment with labor (two years and six months for the defendant) of the lower court on the grounds of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

Defendant

B There is no property damage due to misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

Since R actually acquired the value of the Defendant’s shares and goodwill has more than the amount paid by the Defendant, no property damage has occurred in R, and even if the value of household shares and goodwill does not fall short of the amount paid by the Defendant, the amount of damages suffered by R should be recognized only to the extent that the value of shares and goodwill has been deducted.

It does not constitute a co-principal.

The Defendant, as a seller, merely expressed a seller’s intent to sell, did not seek a method of purchasing stocks and goodwill, did not actively intervene in the process of raising R’s financing, and in particular, did not intervene at all in the process of acquiring C’s shares.

Defendant did not actively contain.

There was no criminal intent for breach of trust.

As long as accounting and legal experts intervene in the process of acquisition of stocks and goodwill, determine and execute the implementation method of the stock acquisition agreement of this case, there was no intention to commit a breach of trust against the defendant.

The sentence against the defendant of the court below on unreasonable sentencing (the 4 years of a suspended sentence on June 2) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

C Since misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles did not actively provide for the purchase of the shares of the defendant with R funds, the defendant does not constitute a co-principal of breach of trust.

The Defendant did not participate in the sale and purchase of shares owned by B.

The stock transaction amount shall be used as the stock transaction amount, out of the funds leaked from R.