The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one hundred months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. It is recognized that there are favorable circumstances such as the fact that the judgment defendant reflects the instant crime in depth, deposited the total amount of defraudation, there is no criminal record of the same kind and suspended execution or more, and he has been working as professor of Busan University and has made efforts for the development of learning.

(1) However, the Defendant, as a professor of the National University, was in a position that requires high level of morality and integrity, but in the course of performing a research and development project in accordance with the State research and development project, the Defendant paid a certain amount of cash for each month to the researcher who has not been registered for the purpose of using cash cards, by claiming false labor costs to the researcher who is not able to claim labor costs, instead of responding to the wrong practices of joint management of labor costs, and by taking advantage of the fact that it is a crime of defraudation of research costs.

One of the arguments is that it is difficult to believe it as it is in light of the statements of E and H, and the argument that it was paid as expenses for participating in academic conferences and seminars, and as expert advisory fees did not submit evidentiary materials. The argument also contains almost all expenses necessary for research activities, such as conference room fees, expenses for utilizing experts, expenses for participating in academic conferences and seminars, expenses for purchasing documentary materials such as books, expenses for office supplies, expenses for domestic travel travel expenses, and transportation expenses in the city, etc., which are supported for research and development tasks, and it seems that there is considerable amount of money that was used for purposes other than research expenses, even if part of the money that the defendant collected by cash card was used as the defendant as alleged by the defendant, as argued by the defendant, even if it was used as part of the money that the defendant collected by cash card, it appears that it would be reasonable to use