Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant shall not commit any act contrary to the interests of the victimized company, such as introducing a company under competition with the victimized company to a person who has been engaged in the business as an agent for the Victim C Co., Ltd. located in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and has been engaged in the business as between October 2, 2012 and June 20, 2016.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, in violation of the above occupational duties, sent to the E, who operated D around May 2016, to the effect that the degree of 20,000 coconuted cocons was needed by the coconuted cocons, and that the above E introduced F Co., Ltd., a company under competition with the victimized company, thereby allowing E to supply E with accelerators equivalent to KRW 9,90,000 at the market price.

As a result, the Defendant obtained the above F pecuniary advantage equivalent to KRW 9,900,000, and suffered property loss equivalent to the same amount from the victim company.

Summary of Evidence

1. Entry of the defendant in part in the first trial record;

1. Legal statements from witnesses E and G;

1. Partial statement concerning the suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant by the prosecution;

1. Labor contracts and written resignation;

1. Detailed statement of transactions;

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel claimed that the current sales status and the operation status of field equipment in 2016 [the Defendant and his defense counsel wanted to receive E’s 20,000 E from 2 to 4 only, but it is impossible to meet the above delivery schedule due to the base payment period of the victimized company, thereby introducing E within a short period of time that can be supplied. As such, it cannot be viewed as an act in violation of the duty, and it cannot be viewed as an act in violation of the duty of the Defendant’s act and there is no possibility of causing or causing damage to the victimized company.

In order to establish a crime of occupational breach of trust, the person who administers another's business obtains pecuniary advantage or let a third party obtain it by acting in violation of his/her duty, thereby causing damage to the principal.