Of them, the part against Defendant C shall be reversed.

Defendant

C shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,000.

Defendant .

A. The punishment (one year of imprisonment, confiscation, and collection) set by the court below against Defendant A is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles are aware of the fact that Defendant D and Q were to contribute KRW 400 million to M University as a school development fund, and did not know that the new construction of this case was given in return for receiving orders. Defendant D introduced Defendant D to Defendant C and Defendant D was accompanied in the process of delivering KRW 400 million to Defendant C. Thus, Defendant B cannot be deemed to have conspired to commit the crime of taking property in breach of trust by Defendant A and C.

(2) The sentence of imprisonment (ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 80 hours of community service) determined by the court below on Defendant B is too unreasonable.

C. The punishment determined by the lower court against Defendant C (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 80 hours of community service) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

D. (1) misunderstanding of facts (A) Defendant D additionally received KRW 300 million, which Defendant D additionally received from Q, from Q, as the so-called “Liber” in return for the effort to induce Q to take the instant new construction work, and Q does not belong to Q that Defendant D additionally demanded KRW 300 million in return for the principle of construction completion.

(B) The Defendant D’s receipt of KRW 150 million from Defendant B and C is merely a service charge in relation to the purchase of the extension site of MUU, and it does not receive a return of the money paid in return for the new construction project of this case.

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on Defendant D (one year and six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, two years of social service, 80 hours of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

E. A prosecutor (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles can be recognized that Defendant D received KRW 400 million from Q in return for the principle of completion of the new construction work in this case, in collaboration with Defendant A, B, and C, the lower court.