Defendant

A All appeals filed by the Defendants and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A’s offering of assistance funds to the F Saemaul Women’s Association (hereinafter “the instant Women’s Association”) as the president of the G Agricultural Cooperatives (hereinafter “GCF”), constitutes “the offering of money executed in accordance with the relevant statutes and the business plan and the budget in accordance with the articles of association” under Article 33(1)1(b) of the Act on Entrusted Elections, including Public Organizations, constitutes “the act of offering money executed in accordance with the relevant statutes and the business plan and the budget” under Article 50-2(2)1(b) of the Agricultural Cooperative Act, and thus, the lower court convicted Defendant A of having committed an act of donation in the course of duties. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Each sentence against the Defendants by the prosecutor of the lower court (a fine of KRW 900,00,000,000,000 for Defendant A, Defendant B, and each fine of KRW 300,00,00 for Defendant C)

2. Determination

A. The lower court’s determination as to Defendant A’s assertion of misunderstanding the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine 1) In order to constitute “the act of offering money and goods executed in accordance with the business plan and the branch budget pursuant to the relevant statutes” as an occupational act, the lower court should be the case where it directly supports it in the relevant statutes and the articles of incorporation, separate from the “business plan and the branch budget” of the cooperative, and unless there exist the statutes or the articles of incorporation directly supporting it, it cannot be deemed that the act of offering money and goods constitutes an occupational act solely on the ground that it was merely disbursed in accordance with the business plan and the branch budget of the cooperative (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do7205, Nov. 16, 2007, etc.). In so doing, the lower court’s determination as to the following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, the education support business for the local agricultural cooperatives, namely, the education and sales for agricultural products produced by its members, and the promotion of agricultural production and management ability.