The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The prosecutor of the facts charged of the instant case: (a) from February 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016, the Defendant was working as the team leader for the installation of closed circuit television (CCTV) at the Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) from February 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016; and (b) retired on June 30, 2016; (c) even if the Defendant retired, he/she was on the part of the Plaintiff, who was in charge of the Plaintiff’s management of the closed circuit D (hereinafter “the instant village”), to ensure that he/she would not cause damage to C by completing the business transfer, etc. so that he/she could enter into a contract with the Plaintiff, a competitor company (hereinafter “IBMC”); and (d) he/she could not be held responsible for each of the instant village’s business chairperson on July 6, 2016.

A/S may provide customer services (A/S) to a newly employed company.

“A false statement is made as if there were problems in C, and the Defendant entered into a contract for the construction of 11,893,650 won closed television in the instant village with the amount of the construction work that the Defendant newly retired from employment (hereinafter “instant contract for construction”) and caused damage equivalent to the same amount as the victim by obtaining property benefits equivalent to KRW 11,893,650 from the IBC (hereinafter “instant contract for construction”).

Appellants, Defendant was prosecuted as an occupational breach of trust.

2. The crime of breach of trust is established when a person who administers another's business obtains pecuniary benefits by an act in violation of his/her duty and causes damage to another person who is the subject of the business, so the subject of the crime must be in the position of dealing with

Here, in order to deal with “other person’s business”, the principal content of the relationship between the parties goes beyond the relationship of debt obligations, and is based on the relationship of trust among them.