1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, citing the instant case, is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the part resulting in a dismissal or addition as follows, and thus, it shall be quoted pursuant to Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

(Other matters alleged by the Defendant in the trial are not significantly different from the contents alleged by the Defendant in the first instance trial, and even if all of the evidence submitted in the first instance and the trial are examined, the fact-finding and the judgment of the first instance court that rejected such argument by the Defendant is justifiable). [The part to be corrected or added] The reasons for the first instance judgment is reasonable.

A. 2) Paragraph 2 (2) (the first instance judgment 2nd to 15th one) is as follows. 2) A de facto operation of 7 school foundations, including the Plaintiff, and 8 private schools established under the said universities, including the Plaintiff, was indicted for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) on December 20, 2012. On October 29, 2015, the Gwangju High Court convicted C of 1,58,110,00 won in total of the faculty expenses of the B university from January 9, 207 to May 4, 2012, sentenced C to 9 years of imprisonment and a fine of 9 billion won (Seoul High Court Decision 2013No318,504 (Joint Judgment) and the Supreme Court Decision 2015No27515 (Joint Judgment) and 2015No2715 (Joint Judgment).

(hereinafter “Related criminal case”). On January 7, 2013, the term “as of January 201, 2013” in the first instance judgment was read as “from January 7, 2013 to January 18 of the same month.”

The grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance

B. 1) Paragraph (1) (2) (2) is as follows. 1) The Plaintiff is against C in order to implement the instant corrective order among the instant audit result dispositions. 1) The Plaintiff is below 109,300 co-owners’ share of 114,041 out of G forest land in Gwangju Mine-gu 109,293m293m2.