특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(뇌물)등
All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles ① 2, 3, 5, and 6 times the Defendant’s statement to the effect that some confessions are made in the suspect interrogation protocol, but this part of the Defendant’s statement is not voluntary.
② The indictment of this case is an incidental law due to discriminatory indictment that abused public prosecution power.
③ The Defendant, on the face of the sentence 36, 37 of the lower judgment, was on the pretext that the sum of KRW 16 million from E in total at eight times at the time and at the place of eight times each of the two millions in the list of annexed crimes, but there was no money or valuables received except for those cases.
The Defendant did not commit an unlawful act in the course of performing his/her duties, such as providing He/she with crackdown information on the H game head in the G management of the F.
Defendant did not receive money and valuables from J through E, and did not commit unlawful acts while performing his/her duties, such as providing theJ with crackdown information.
2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (a prison term of three years and six months, an additional collection charge of 42 million won) is too heavy.
B. Prosecutor 1) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor as to the charges of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery) and the charges of illegal disposal after accepting a bribe of KRW 70 million from F, and providing enforcement information, etc., after receiving a bribe of KRW 51 million from J, each of the charges of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery) and the charges of bribery of KRW 1,00,000 from the provision of control information on Q Games, the court below acquitted the Defendant on each of the charges of illegal disposal, despite the fact that the prosecutor submitted such facts. In so determining, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too minor.
2. Determination
A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine