All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds for the Defendant’s appeal, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of violating the Subsidy Management Act among the facts charged in the instant case (hereinafter “Subsidy Management Act”).

The judgment below

Examining the grounds of appeal in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “a person who received subsidies by false application or other unlawful means” under Article 40 subparag. 1 of the Subsidy Management Act, contrary to the grounds of appeal, by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, contrary to logical and empirical rules.

2. On the grounds of the prosecutor’s appeal, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment that acquitted the Defendant, on the ground that there was no proof of crime regarding the following: (a) the following facts charged: (b) the production of electronic records, etc., and the use of electronic records, etc., and the forgery and use of forged official documents.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the bounds of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment of the crime of forgery of private documents, such as private electronic records, and by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

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