2. The fact that the defendant recognized all of each of the crimes of this case when the judgment was made in the trial, and reflects the wrongness, that the defendant did not have any other criminal records except sentenced to the fine due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and that the defendant deposited the total amount of the penalty in the original trial is favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant takes advantage of his superior position that the amount received over a long-term period from the suppliers exceeds 147,00,000 won, and that the defendant gives convenience to the company G after acceptance so that he can deliver the delivery quantity without changing the contract price to the company G, and that he can do so by providing information on the projects in which the two industries are being carried out or being promoted, the scale of the projects in which he intends to participate in the bidding, specifications, bidding price, and so on.

In addition, the sentence for two years sentenced by the court below shall be sentenced to the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Committee of the Supreme Court (the decision of a type ] 4 (100 million won or more) 4 (special sentencing person) : where a person commits an illegal act in relation to a flood. [Scope of recommending punishment] : Imprisonment with prison labor for two years or five years : The maximum of the one-stage increase recommended type as a result of the combination of concurrent crimes, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, the circumstances and result of each of the crimes of this case, etc., and all of the sentencing conditions of this case, such as the following circumstances, are too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so ordered as per Disposition.