The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged of the instant case sold a spathy in the Defendant’s spathy field to C around August 10, 2013. Since C sold the said spathy to the victim E around August 11, 2013, the Defendant had a duty to preserve the said spathy until the victim received the said spathy.

Nevertheless, the Defendant violated his duties on September 8, 2013, and followed 20,000,000,000 won of the market value of the Defendant, and acquired the same amount of property profits and sustained the same amount of property damage to the victim.

2. The crime of breach of trust is established when a person who administers another’s business obtains property benefits by an unlawful act of breach of duty and causes damage to another person who is the subject of the business. Thus, the subject of the crime must have the status of administering another’s business.

In order to be recognized as “management of another’s business,” it should be limited to cases where the whole or part of another’s business concerning the management of property is performed on behalf of the other party or where the other party cooperates in preserving another’s property. If the essential substance of the relationship between the two parties goes beyond a mere obligation under a fiduciary relationship among them, and is to protect or manage the other party’s property on the basis of a fiduciary relationship. If the business is not a business of the other party, and if the business is not a business of the other party, it does not constitute a person who administers another’s business (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Do3482, Feb. 27, 2014). Cases where a contract takes effect when one of the parties agrees to transfer a property right to the other party and the other party agrees to pay the price thereof (see Article 563 of the Civil Act), barring special circumstances.