Defendant

C, D’s appeal and prosecutor’s appeal against Defendant A and B are all dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In full view of the objective evidence such as the public prosecutor (as to Defendant A and B, hereinafter referred to as the above Defendants in this paragraph, hereinafter referred to as “Defendants”) mistake of facts (as to the part not guilty portion in the judgment of the court below against the Defendants), the statement by the money donor S, which can be called direct evidence of each of the facts charged, is difficult without very specific and actual experience. The method of raising and managing funds used as the funds for rebates at the time of the crime along with the Defendant’s statement, and the results of conducting false tax invoices on the methods of raising and managing the funds, internal tax invoices on the source of the funds used as the rebates at the time of the crime, and the results of conducting the financial tracking, such as R and S’s business trip application on the day of the crime, LW access details, R, X, and W’s statements. Nevertheless, the court below rejected the credibility of S’s statement on the grounds of its stated reasoning, and there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge the facts charged, and thus, found the Defendants not guilty of each of the above facts charged against the Defendants.

B. Defendant C (Undue Practices) defense counsel of Defendant C (hereinafter “Defendant C”) asserts to the effect that “Defendant C has led to the confession of all the facts charged in the instant case at the lower court, but the part relating to the amount of the said confessions, in particular, did not have accurate memory, is merely the presentation of S’s statement even though it did not have accurate memory.” Defendant C’s defense counsel sufficiently examined the credibility of S’s statement and tried to decide ex officio on the mistake of facts in the lower judgment.