All appeals filed by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (1) The lower court found Defendant A as guilty of the facts charged in the instant case by misunderstanding facts or misapprehending the legal doctrine as follows. ① As to the fact of violation of the Local Education Autonomy Act due to election campaign using special status, Defendant A’s incorporated association H (hereinafter “H”) is erroneous.

(G) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”).

(2) A H (hereinafter collectively referred to as “research institute, etc.”)

D) On June 13, 2018, the election of the F Superintendent of the Office of Education of the 7th regional election (hereinafter referred to as “instant election”) implemented on June 13, 2018 with respect to D who is an employee by taking advantage of an official act

(2) With regard to the fact of violation of the Local Education Autonomy Act due to the provision of money and valuables related to election campaign, money and valuables paid to Defendant C and D constitutes wages paid to employees of the research institute operated by Defendant A, and money and valuables paid to M constitutes money and valuables provided by Defendant A in connection with election campaign. It cannot be deemed that they constitute money and valuables provided by Defendant A in connection with the election campaign. (2) The sentence (6 months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) sentenced by the lower court of unfair sentencing to Defendant A is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles constitutes wages paid to employees of the research institute, etc. operated by Defendant A, and money and valuables paid to Defendant B shall not be deemed money and valuables provided by Defendant B in connection with an election campaign because they fall under the consideration for the publication and commemorative association services provided by Defendant A. 2) The punishment (fine 7 million won) sentenced by the lower court to Defendant B is too unreasonable.

C. Money and valuables received by Defendant C, D1 by mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles are limited to the amount of money and valuables received while working as an employee of the research institute operated by Defendant C and D.