The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The defendant has been delegated with the authority to exclusively manage and use the land of this case by the victim clans, and the lease as stated in the facts charged is an act within the above scope of authority, there was no loss due to the lease, and there was no intention of the defendant to commit the crime of breach of trust.

Nevertheless, the lower court convicted the Defendant by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

The lower court’s imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment) against the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In the facts charged of this case, a public prosecutor held that “The victim suffered property loss due to the act of violating the above duties of the defendant, which caused the change of its form and quality to a neighboring park regardless of the will of the victim, by which the victim lost an opportunity to purchase by consultation or request for expropriation, and the real estate price significantly falls at least 50%.” Accordingly, the defendant violated his duties, thereby obtaining pecuniary benefits of KRW 50 million, and making the victim lose an opportunity to request purchase by consultation or expropriation, and at the same time making the real estate price significantly fall at 50% or more,” and the part of the facts charged of this case “The victim suffered property loss due to the act of violating the above duties of the defendant, which caused the loss of opportunity to request purchase by consultation or expropriation. Accordingly, in handling other person’s affairs, the defendant applied for permission to change the contents of this case to the effect that “The defendant lost an opportunity to request purchase by consultation or expropriation to the victim and lost an opportunity to request purchase by consultation or expropriation.” This is no longer subject to the judgment below.

The defendant's mistake of facts.