A. (A) Of the facts charged against Defendant A, the lower court determined as follows: (a) D (hereinafter “D”) as an incorporated association of the C Group among the facts charged against Defendant A.

(B) The lower court convicted Defendant B of the abuse of official authority, obstruction of use, and coercion in relation to support, violation of the Subsidy Management Act, violation of the Act on the Management of Subsidies, occupational embezzlement, and abuse of official authority, obstruction of exercise of rights, and coercion in relation to the conclusion of proxy service contract concerning the establishment and operation of the sports team for the disabled of the Z (hereinafter “Z”) among the facts charged against Defendant B, and convicted Defendant B of the violation of the Act on Testimony, on the ground that “the abuse of official authority, obstruction of use, and coercion in relation to the selection of an institution entrusted with overseas training of the AI, abuse of authority, and coercion of official duty, leakage of confidential information, and coercion in the National Assembly.” On the other hand, the lower court acquitted Defendant B of the facts charged against Defendant B on the ground that “the abuse of official authority, obstruction of use, and coercion in relation to support of the group” was scheduled to be paid on November 1, 2016, and that Defendant B’s abuse of official authority and coercion of unfair sentencing are not guilty.”

The prosecutor appealed from the judgment of the court below on the grounds of misunderstanding of facts as to the acquittal part of the order against Defendant B, and did not appeal the acquittal part of the reasoning against the Defendants.

3. The judgment of the court prior to remand reversed the part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A and acquitted the facts charged against the violation of the Subsidy Management Act and the facts charged against fraud.