Of the judgment of the first instance, Defendant A’s guilty portion is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months.

except that this judgment.

1. Of the facts charged against the Defendant, the first instance court rendered a judgment of innocence on the charge of violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act (the divulgence, etc. of trade secrets) regarding the leakage of secret and mixed ratio necessary for the color of actual containers, and on the charge of occupational breach of trust against the file files listed in the attached Table No. 103 at the first instance judgment, the judgment of innocence was rendered, and on the charge of violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act (the divulgence, etc. of trade secrets) as to the remaining raw materials and mixed ratio of “O”, and on the charge of occupational breach of trust against each file listed in the attached Table No. 1 of the first instance judgment, the judgment of acquittal was rendered, and on the charge of occupational breach of trust against each of the above parts. The Defendant only appealed the judgment of conviction against the above part.

Therefore, the judgment of innocence in the judgment of the first instance is finalized as it is, and the verdict of innocence in the reasoning is indivisible by the principle of appeal, but that part is not subject to adjudication after being exempted from the object of attack and defense between the parties (see Supreme Court Decision 90Do2820 delivered on March 12, 191), and it is decided to be limited to the conviction part among the judgment of the first instance court.

2. Grounds for appeal as to the violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act (such as divulgence of trade secrets) and the determination thereof (the Defendants, mistake of facts, or misapprehension of legal principles)

A. (i) The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (i) the use of “O” and the mixed ratio of the raw materials and the mixed ratio that were delivered between the Defendants I (hereinafter “victim”) shall not be deemed as the business secrets of Korea-registered AL (for example 2) as it is substantially identical with the previous content and publicly notified by mDS (material safety and health data).

The relevant information, which was delivered between the Defendants Ⅱ, was not specified in the raw materials used or the mixing ratio, and was a fair condition.