The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to Article 11 of the Act on Citizen Participation in Criminal Trials by the misunderstanding of the legal principles as to the decision to refer the case to the ordinary procedure by the court below (hereinafter “the Act on Citizen Participation in Criminal Trials”), the court hearing the opinion of the defendant or his defense counsel before rendering a decision to refer the case to the ordinary procedure. However, the court below, in violation of the above provision, has referred the case to the ordinary procedure and deliberated, and thus, the judgment

B. The Defendant asserted the misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal principles as to the determination of guilty of the lower court was prepared by the Defendant, on August 1, 2011, in the course of concluding a contract on high-income rice with the president of the Dental Association (former title: E, incorporated associationF Association, hereinafter “the Dental Association”) comprehensively delegated the conclusion of the seed supply contract with the president of the Dental Association (hereinafter “E”) and, upon entering into the agreement on the conclusion of the seed supply contract, the Danam-gun, J Nonghyup, incorporated association M Chungcheongbuk-do Association (hereinafter “M Chungcheong-do Association”), and the Defendant appeared to be misunderstanding of the legal principles as to the minutes (i.e., the letter of delegation, agreement, seed supply contract, seed estimate, etc.) of the meeting minutes of the Dental Association (hereinafter “Council of this case”) (i.e., “the minutes of this case”), and (ii) the Defendant did not have any influence on the Defendant’s testimony or omission of the judgment as a witness within the scope of 201 to 30 minutes of the Dental or 5 minutes of this case.