All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds for appeal by the defendant

A. On the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, found that the Defendant committed a violation of the Agricultural Cooperative Act and the Act on Entrusted Elections, including public organizations, by making contributions to H, N, and J as a member of the instant charges (excluding the part not guilty of the grounds for appeal).

The decision was determined.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misunderstanding facts against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the scope of contributions prohibited under the Act on Entrusted Elections, such as the Agricultural Cooperatives Act and public organizations, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the intent thereof, or by violating the statutory principle on the type of crime.

B. On the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court, on March 11, 2015, held that the statute of limitations has not expired since the Defendant made each contribution to the instant facts charged (except for the portion not guilty of grounds) and the instant indictment was instituted six months before the date on which the aforementioned election was held, on the grounds that the statute of limitations has not expired.

In the light of this, I went to make a decision on the merits.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal principles on the prescription of public prosecution as prescribed by Article 172(4) of the Agricultural Cooperative Act, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the statutory principle on the type of crime and equality, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

(c)

In order to recognize multiple criminal acts as a single crime by combining several criminal acts, each criminal act has the unity of a criminal intent, there is time relevance between each criminal act, and multiple criminal acts can be assessed as a single crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do7503, Sept. 8, 2011). The lower court is the instant case.