1. According to the reasoning of the judgment below as to the prosecutor's grounds of appeal, the court below affirmed the judgment of the court of first instance that acquitted the Defendants on the charges of violating the Public Official Election Act due to the Defendants' expression of intention to offer a direct position to the public corporation, on the grounds that the Defendants' expression of "in managing our research institute's admission to the public corporation" would help them in the future L's political activities, and that it cannot be seen as an expression of intention to offer a direct position to the public corporation.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no violation of law by recognizing facts in violation of logical and empirical rules, thereby exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

2. According to the reasoning of the judgment below as to Defendant B’s grounds of appeal, the court below found Defendant B guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that it can be acknowledged that Defendant B expressed his intent to maintain dignity for about 10 months until the presidential election after the resignation of the candidate, in consideration of the resignation of the candidate.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no violation of law by recognizing facts in violation of logical and empirical rules, thereby exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

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