The judgment below

Of them, the part of conviction against Defendant A and the part against Defendant F shall be reversed.

Defendant

B, D. D.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A’s misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, and Defendant A’s assertion 1) on January 201, 201, with respect to a contract for purchase and sale of Saturdays (the criminal facts of the lower judgment No. 2017 Gohap 32, 2017, hereinafter “instant contract for purchase and sale”), the instant contract does not constitute a breach of trust, as it is difficult to readily conclude that the instant contract is a contract concluded in the form of a contract for supporting the construction of the vinyl house in B.

② Even if the instant Saturdays and sales contract was concluded formally in order to support B, the Defendant did not report that the instant contract was concluded and executed with subordinate employees of H, such as C and D (hereinafter “H”), or that it was concluded and executed with a view to supporting the new construction of a vinyl house, as such, the Defendant did not intend to commit a breach of trust.

2) A loan of KRW 320,00,000 on the supply of materials on November 30, 201 and November 30, 2011 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2017Da32, Sept. 32, 201)

A. Regarding the facts constituting the crime of this case (hereinafter “supply and loan of the materials of this case”), the Defendant did not receive from his subordinate employees the fact that the supply and loan of the materials of this case was in violation of H, and the Defendant did not know that each of the above acts was conducted for the purpose of providing funds to E. Thus, there was no intention of breach of trust.

3) In relation to a false purchase of rice (the instant rice purchase project) (hereinafter “the instant rice purchase project”), in light of the following: (a) farmers have interest in reducing the malicious loan as H if they receive the rice purchase fund and repay the loan to H within the time limit; (b) farmers have delivered the rice to H in the manner of possession revision; (c) farmers have no special interest other than receiving the purchase fund by purchasing the rice at approximately 1,2 months; and (d) farmers have no interest in receiving the purchase price by taking over the rice purchased by H in kind.