A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months and by imprisonment for eight months, respectively.

However, this judgment is delivered against Defendant B.

Defendant

A is a person in charge of multiple sirens duties while serving as a principal agent in the general strike of A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “I”), and Defendant B is a person operating J, who is an enterprise that supplies expendable goods to I.

1. Defendant A, from January 201, was in charge of the management of expendable goods while working in I Twit from around January 201, and was in charge of the selection of a composite siren from early 2014, Defendant A had the authority to substantially affect the selection of clients or the determination of ordered items, quantity, etc.

On October 31, 2014, the Defendant received an illegal solicitation from B to the effect that he is able to receive I’s consumable goods supply business or complex siren-related convenience, prior to the after apartment of the Goakdong-dong-gu Seoul Metropolitan City Magdong-gu Magdong-gu Magdong-gu Magdong-si, and received one set of benz E250I car (including insurance premiums and registration expenses, and equivalent to 73,547,740 won) from B to purchase insurance and vehicle registration.

As a result, the defendant acquired property in return for an illegal solicitation in relation to his duties as a person to handle another's business.

2. Defendant B made an illegal solicitation with respect to A’s duties at the time and place specified in paragraph 1, and granted the same in return.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each legal statement of witness K and L;

1. Each prosecutor's interrogation protocol of M or N;

1. Statement of the police and prosecutor's office concerning theO;

1. Statement of the police about P;

1. Recording notes, recorded CDs (Evidence Nos. 41, 41-1), and Defendant A’s written statement (Evidence Nos. 73);

1. A request for proposal relating to the I Complex Introduction Contract (Evidence Nos. 2), a request for proposal to combine office equipment (Evidence Nos. 3), a company evaluation results (integrated No. 4), a complex evaluation, and a result of BMT (Evidence No. 5).