All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) Fact-misunderstanding (1) The Defendants’ occupational breach of trust against the Defendants constitutes a major business asset, i.e., the judgment of the court below that was used by the Defendants in producing K’s test server (hereinafter “L”) and the J’s bar code file, which was attached to the judgment of the court below (hereinafter “Attachment List”).

(2) Violation of the Copyright Act against the Defendants (A) The re-filings Nos. 29,30 of the crime list Nos. 29, and 30 of the annexed crimes were reproduced before the test of the K Programs produced by the Defendants.

(B) Defendant B conspired to reproduce the file Nos. 1 through 28 of the daily list of crimes with Defendant A and the attached Form No. 28 before the K Programs test.

B. Sentencing of the lower court’s sentence against Defendant A (a punishment of KRW 3 million, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment as to the assertion of mistake of facts (1) as to the Defendants’ occupational breach of trust (A) Defendant A entered L on October 18, 2004 and was in charge of the development of L’s PC protection program (the part in charge of managing L’s PC) from April 18, 2008. After the L’s management program was issued on April 2008 as the L’s management program team leader on August 2009, Defendant A was in charge of the I, J’s product planning, design, development, and operation of L’s PC management program, as the team leader of L’s L’s PC management program, and around May 31, 2010, Defendant A was in charge of the development of K’s program as a person operating the K PC development program on May 31, 2010.

Defendant

B entered L on January 24, 2003, and was in charge of the development of L's carter part (the part in charge of managing L's PC room management program). Since January 24, 2009, L's carter part, which is L's PC room management program, was developed.