The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Busan High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal by the defendant

A. As to the first ground for appeal, the crime of violation of the Local Education Autonomy Act due to false entry of Article 50 of the Local Education Autonomy Act and Article 49(1) of the Political Funds Act is established with false entry of the election expenses without justifiable grounds by the accountant in charge. However, even if the false entry of various election expenses is entered in one accounting report, it is not a separate crime according to the election expenses item, but a crime of violation of the Local Education Autonomy Act is established as a whole.

However, the lower court, based on the premise that the crime of violation of the Local Education Autonomy Act due to false entry of each of the above accounting reports by the Defendant was established according to the election expense items stated in the false statement, imposed a punishment within the scope of the term of punishment imposed for concurrent crimes pursuant to the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the number of crimes of violation of the Local Education Autonomy Act due to false entry in the accounting report, thereby making a difference in the scope of punishment, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2003Do6288, Dec. 26, 2003; 2008Do5794, Sept. 11, 2008). Therefore, the ground for appeal pointing this out is with merit.

B. As to the second ground of appeal, if the defendant submitted a single request for the preservation of election expenses in which several election expenses items are falsely stated, and received excessive preservation of election expenses from the Republic of Korea, it shall be deemed as one crime, and it shall not be deemed as a separate crime in accordance with each election expenses item.

Even so, the lower court is premised on the fact that each crime of fraud is established according to the election expense items entered falsely by the Defendant.