Of the judgment of the first instance, the Defendants’ conviction part shall be reversed.

The Defendants are not guilty. The Prosecutor is not guilty.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants 1) Data Rid (U) of L Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Appellant”) which is the complainants as to whether the facts charged were specified (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles)

5. Drupture, the complainant company’s beauty program (X. hereinafter “cupture program of the complainant company”) and DNA program (Y. hereinafter “cupture program of the complainant company”) (hereinafter “cupture program of the complainant company”) are a set of several bar codes. Since the bar code used by the Defendants was not specified in the facts charged in the instant case, the defendants could not exercise their right of defense as appropriate.

Nevertheless, the facts charged are specified.

In the first instance trial, there is an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

B) Whether the program code of this case by the complainants is trade secret or (1) the program of this case by the complainants is automatically generated by open source and development dispute, and its portion is not small, so the program of this case is lacking in non-public nature.

(2) The instant program by the complainant is very small and qualitative in the tax accounting program, and it is not economically useful because it can be easily reproduced by using open source.

(3) At the time when Defendant A and B had access to the source code of the instant program by the complainant company, Defendant A and B did not make considerable efforts to manage the program source code of the instant company as confidential in the BU (hereinafter “BU”) and the CD Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”) prior to the merger with the complainant company.

C) Whether the Defendants used the program code of the instant case by the complainant company (hereinafter “the Defendants”).