The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and legal principles 1) Defendant sent to BI, a representative of F on April 20, 2015, by e-mail, a copy of the Creav. pdf file design drawings for Coreav.pf files.

(hereinafter referred to as “the file of this case”) cannot be deemed as a principal business asset of the victim D Co., Ltd. (the representative E; hereinafter “victim”).

2) Around October 2014, the Defendant recognized the fact that some files of the victimized company were stored in the Nowon-do and USB owned by the victimized company. However, the Defendant merely revised part of the design design drawing to make the previous design drawing at the demand of the victimized company due to the supply of the machinery from the F, and made the file of this case by making it possible to change the size only. Since it was not unlawfully used or leaked to the outside, the Defendant did not have any intention to breach of trust.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (five years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the trial of the party, the part of the instant facts charged does not exceed 18 (in the judgment below No. 2, No. 15 through 20) by the ex officio judgment prosecutor is “The Defendant was supplied by BI, a representative of F, at the F Office located in the city of the Chinese Drhegical port on April 2015.”

Corecav's gold type F to be directly produced by F, sending a map of the gold type.

In other words, upon receipt of a request to the effect that "", around April 20, 2015, at the same place as BI sent the Corecav. Pdf file, a major asset of the victimized company, to e-mail (G) to enable the F to obtain pecuniary benefits equivalent to the amount of the market exchange price in which the total amount of 1.5 billion won of the research development cost is invested, and to the victimized company, there was an unproperty loss, such as the reduction of profits due to the reduction of competitiveness, etc.

“Application for Amendments to Bill of Indictment was filed, and this Court permitted this and changed the subject of the judgment in the trial.