The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court is justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged (excluding the portion not guilty of the reasoning) on the grounds indicated in its reasoning.

Recognizing the fact that the Defendant should not use the research and development costs of this case for any purpose other than research and development, if he/she has concealed part of the research and development costs to use them for the purpose other than research and development, and received research development costs by submitting a detailed statement of research and development costs, and used part of them to repay the pre-existing transaction costs, it can be deemed as a deception against the victim.

The lower court did not exhaust all necessary deliberations, as alleged in the grounds of appeal, and did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on deception, relation with the person in fraud, and the intent of defraudation in fraud.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.