The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant did not receive money from the F, who is a teacher of D High School, in response to a request for a heavy disciplinary measure, such as removal from office, in connection with disciplinary action, and the Defendant, the president of the said school foundation, was not at a position to affect the exercise of disciplinary authority by the Disciplinary Committee.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts that found the defendant guilty.

2. Determination 1) The crime of taking property in breach of trust under Article 357 (1) of the Criminal Act is established when a person who administers another person's business obtains property or property benefits in exchange for an illegal solicitation in connection with his/her duties. A person who does not have such status can be the subject of the crime only when he/she processes another person's business. "a person who administers another's business" as the subject of the crime of taking property in breach of trust means a person who is deemed to have a fiduciary relationship in light of the principle of good faith and sincerity. It does not necessarily require that a person who administers another's business has a authority to conduct the business in an external relationship with a third person. In addition, it does not require that the business be a comprehensive entrustment. The grounds for taking property in breach of trust, namely, the occurrence of fiduciary relationship, can occur through legal acts, customs, or management, and thus, "a person who administers another's business" can be a person who administers another's business directly or indirectly, including a person who administers another's business within the scope of his/her own authority.