Defendant

B The appeal by the prosecutor against the defendant A and the prosecutor against the defendant A are all dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B’s acts indicated in the facts charged of mistake or misapprehension of the legal doctrine do not aim at having “E” company and “F” cancel the contract with the victimized company and induce the victimized company to conclude a new contract with “D” (hereinafter “D”).

It is only based on the independent judgment that the above trading company has terminated the contract with the victimized company, and is irrelevant to the defendant B's act.

In the case of F, Defendant B entered into an agency contract with Defendant B after withdrawal, and terminated the agency contract with the victimized company.

In light of these points, Defendant B committed an act in violation of his duties as an employee of the injured company

In addition, Defendant B did not have the intention of breach of trust.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found Defendant B guilty is erroneous by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant B (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of the execution of two years, and the community service hours of 180 hours) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor (misunderstanding the part of the lower judgment regarding Defendant A, misunderstanding of the facts, or misapprehension of the legal doctrine) agreed among the Defendants to establish a new company from May 2, 2015 to June, 2015, or conspired to commit the instant crime by itself with the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor.

There is no evidence to determine the person, and comprehensively taking account of the circumstances in its reasoning, Defendant A attempted to gain profits arising from Defendant B’s occupational breach of trust by taking advantage of Defendant B’s occupational breach of trust, and actively participated in Defendant B’s occupational breach of trust or participating in the entire process.

On the ground that it is difficult to recognize it, the lower court acquitted Defendant A of the charges.

(b).