The lower judgment against the Defendants is reversed.

Defendant

C A person shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A and B (misunderstanding of facts and legal principles) as a result of the 64 local election forecast and investigation conducted by Defendant B, 17 Mayors/Do Governors’ forecast and investigation conducted by Defendant B (hereinafter “the result of the instant forecast and investigation”) lost a public nature and did not maintain a secret, and thus does not constitute a trade secret.

Defendant

A and B did not have the intention to use trade secrets illegally, and not have the intention to do so, and there was no illegal purpose.

B. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding the facts and legal principles with respect to Defendant D Co., Ltd., Defendant D (hereinafter “D”) did not provide education to prevent the infringement of trade secrets of others. As a result of forecast and investigation, prior instructions on news reports were ambiguous, and supervision was not performed properly after instruction was given, and there was no institutional device to prevent this.

Defendant

D was negligent in giving due attention and supervision to prevent unlawful use of trade secrets.

2) The primary facts charged against Defendant C’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to Defendant C’s occupational breach of trust are as follows: (a) Defendant C, a person in charge of performing prediction and investigation services at 64 local election forecast and assessment services at the vice president of H (hereinafter “H”) and performed a de facto representative role; (b) Defendant C, in accordance with the agreement or good faith principle, bears the duty of confidentiality against Defendant C (E, F, and G).

The crime of breach of trust does not require actual damage and there was a risk of damage to three terrestrial companies.

B) As the ancillary facts charged as to the occupational breach of trust were either compensated for damages to three terrestrial companies, or incurred losses that were excluded from those subject to the next project entity’s selection, Defendant C constitutes a crime of occupational breach of trust.

C) DA’s violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act is the customer of H, and the damage to the third party on the ground.