1. The part of the judgment below against Defendant C, E, and F and the guilty part against Defendant A (including the acquittal part in the reasons).

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Each document submitted by the counsel of the Defendants regarding the period for submitting the grounds for appeal shall be considered to the extent of supplement in case of supplement in the grounds for appeal.

Defendant C and F Defendant A’s defense counsel asserted that Defendant A was not an institution affiliated with the H University Industry Cooperation Foundation in relation to fraud, violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), and violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Misappropriation) and the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes in relation to the facts charged in this case against Defendant A, and argued that the said Defendant did not commit any deception against H University Industry Cooperation Foundation, and that the said Defendant did not handle the affairs of H University Industry Cooperation Foundation, and that there was no intention to commit fraud or breach of trust. However, each of

And the public prosecutor (defendant A, B, E, F, and D) [Defendant C] A] and D’s statement of D who asserted a misunderstanding of facts as to the acceptance of bribe from A is limited to Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant”) in the relevant item after appropriating funds received from A.

The following shall be applicable:

It cannot be ruled out that there is no possibility that it has been in the intention to transfer responsibility to the public.

Furthermore, as shown below, D's statements are inconsistent with objective evidence.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that judged that the defendant received a bribe from the Nos. 1, 3-9, 12, 14, 15 of the annexed crime list Nos. 1, 3-9, 15 of the annexed crime list was erroneous.

On December 14, 2011, the fact of acceptance of bribe (attached Table IX No. 1) D did not visit theO on December 14, 2011.

The defendant has not received a bribe in connection with D on the above date.

On December 28, 2012, the fact of acceptance of bribe (attached Table IX Nos. 3) D did not visit the O on December 28, 2012.

The defendant has not received a bribe in connection with D on the above date.

Around February 4, 2013, around April 2013