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 cited by the court of first instance is as follows: (a) the part of the judgment of the court of first instance is modified as described in paragraph (2) below; and (b) the Defendant’s part of the allegation emphasized again in the trial is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition under paragraph (3) below; and (c) thus, it is cited

2. Parts to be corrected;

(a) Part 3 “Korea Railroad Research Institute” shall be deemed to be “Korea Railroad Technology Research Institute,” and part 14 “(voluntary entry of the observer’s signature)” in the same page shall be deemed to be “(voluntary entry of the observer’s signature)”, and part 5 “ September 3, 2014” in Part 7 shall be deemed to be “ September 3, 2012.”

(b) from the 5th page to the 4th page, the phrase “the recognition in addition to the above recognition facts” is replaced by the phrase “the recognition in question and the purport of the entire arguments as a whole.”

(c) Part 6, Paragraph 2, “The side of the National Land and Transport Technology Promotion Agency” is dismissed as “the side of the National Land and Transport Technology Promotion Agency,” and the part 6, “in light of the facts notified to the G,” is changed to “as long as it appears that G was the same as the attendance at meetings and meals at the time, even if not explicitly notified,” and the part 9, “explied Dong” is changed to “explient consent”.

In Chapter 6, “The recognition of the withdrawal equipment from September 20, 2012 is difficult to be deemed to be an act for any purpose other than its original purpose” in Chapter 7, Section 2, of the last act of the 6th act, only for the purpose other than the purpose of the research fund, to the effect that the Plaintiff also recognized the fact that the Plaintiff was going on a business trip from September 19, 2012 to September 21, 2012. Furthermore, inasmuch as the Defendant recognized the full amount of the withdrawal equipment during the said business trip period, including the accommodation cost after the first investigation, the Plaintiff submitted the said simplified receipt with evidentiary materials on the accommodation expenses from September 20, 2012 during the said business trip.