All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Scope of trial of the political party after remand;

A. 1) The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Embezzlement), false entry into public electronic records, etc., and the exercise of false entry into public electronic records, etc., among the facts charged in the instant case, and found the Defendant guilty of the occupational embezzlement. As to the guilty portion, the lower court rejected the prosecutor’s appeal on the charge of false entry into public electronic records, etc. and the exercise of false entry into public electronic records, etc., among the acquitted portion of the lower judgment, and found the Defendant guilty of the charges. In so doing, the lower court dismissed the prosecutor’s appeal on the charge of the violation of the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) among the acquitted portion of the lower judgment on the grounds that the guilty portion of the lower judgment and the guilty portion of the lower judgment are concurrent crimes under the former part of

Therefore, the Defendant appealed to the judgment of the party before remand and filed an appeal, but the prosecutor did not file an appeal.

3) The Supreme Court reversed and remanded the conviction portion of the judgment prior to remand on the ground that “the judgment prior to remand contains an error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles on the establishment of the crime of false entry, etc. in public records, etc., such as electromagnetic records, etc., in the judgment prior to remand.”

Therefore, the scope of the trial after remand is limited to ① occupational embezzlement, which is the guilty part of the judgment of the court prior to remand, and ② false entry into public electronic records, etc., and the exercise of false entry into public electronic records, etc.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding as to Defendant 1’s occupational embezzlement and mistake of facts.