The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Daegu District Court Panel Division.

1. 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

Here, “a person’s business” in order to deal with another’s business is required to protect or manage another’s property on the basis of a fiduciary relationship between the parties, beyond a simple relationship of claims and obligations. If the business is not a person’s business but a person’s own business, the person does not constitute a person who administers another’s business, even if the principal substance of the relationship is not a person’s business

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2008Do10479 Decided January 20, 201 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2008Do10479, Jan. 20, 201). As a matter of principle, an obligor’s obligation to perform in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement constitutes “one’s own business” in a promise of accord and satisfaction where the obligor bears the obligation to the obligee

The obligor’s obligation to transfer ownership of real estate in accordance with the pre-contract for payment in substitutes is not conclusive at the time of the pre-contract, but is at issue only after the obligee exercised the right to complete the pre-contract because the obligor was unable to return the borrowed money from time to time. The obligor may, even after exercising the right to complete the pre-contract, extinguish the obligation to perform the procedure for transfer of ownership of the real estate by paying out the monetary debt

On the other hand, an obligee has a major interest in evaluating the value of the relevant real estate as a collateral rather than a specific object itself, and thereby receiving an existing monetary claim, so the obligor's default.