All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) In full view of the following circumstances, the Defendants did not commit deception and did not intend to obtain deception, and did not intend to obtain deception.

There was no damage on the side of the Seoul University Industry-Academic Cooperation Foundation.

The lower court erred in determining otherwise.

In light of the fact that “G business (hereinafter “G business”)’s research period has been set at nine months, but actually employed researchers, etc. on a yearly basis, the characteristics of the research, which were registered researchers, etc., and the researchers, etc. who participated in the actual research have no choice but to change in the number of researchers, etc. who participated in the research, without reflecting the actual status of the research funds, and the research funds have been set to increase the number of researchers, etc. corresponding to the number of researchers, etc., the Seoul University Industry-Academic Cooperation Foundation registered the researchers, etc., as required by the Seoul University Industry-Academic Cooperation Foundation, once the number of researchers, etc. were registered, and the personnel expenses paid directly to them are not paid for the said period (other than three months for the research period).

An industry-academic cooperation foundation for the Seoul National University was well aware of this situation.

Since the research expenses for the G project shall be calculated by multiplying the recruitment number by the recruitment unit price and the recruitment unit price per person, the research expenses shall not be refunded unless the recruitment number arises.

The F Hospital Research Institute, etc. has always met the recruitment number.

The Defendants did not use the research funds made by the method of refund for private purposes.

(2) The lower court’s sentence is too heavy.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence to the lower court is too minor.

2. Determination

A. In addition to the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence examined by the appellate court, the lower court’s determination on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal doctrine was based on the grounds revealed in the determination of the Defendants and the defense counsel.