All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

With respect to the violation of the Agricultural Cooperative Act against the Defendants among the facts charged in the instant case, Article 35(1)7 of the Agricultural Cooperative Act provides for “the formulation of a business plan, the formulation of a budget for revenue and expenditure, the amendment of important matters stipulated by the articles of association among the budget for the project plan and the budget for revenue and expenditure,” and Article 37(1)8(a) of the articles of association of the HH Agricultural Cooperative provides for “the matters concerning the additional compilation of the budget for expenditure required for any reason that occurred after the determination of the budget for revenue and expenditure” as a matter of a general meeting. However, even according to the facts charged, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment that acquitted the Defendants of this part of the facts charged on the ground that there was no proof of criminal facts on the grounds that it was impossible for the Defendants to know whether the “additional compilation of the budget for expenditure” was required from the business plan and the budget for revenue and expenditure in 2013, 2014.

B. As to Defendant A, C, D, and E’s violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, among the facts charged in the instant case, the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone that the said Defendants had the intention of breach of trust.

The court maintained the first instance judgment that acquitted the Defendant on this part of the facts charged on the ground that there is no proof of criminal facts.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court, as alleged in the grounds of appeal, erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the interpretation of the Agricultural Cooperatives Act and the articles of association of HF Agricultural Cooperatives, or by misapprehending the facts in violation of logical and empirical

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.