변호사법위반
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is not consistent with I's investigation agency and the court below's testimony in the court below's judgment, and the defendants gave advice to I on the auction price, and the defendant Eul received money from I in return for the waiver of the auction information, and the defendant Eul decided that he was guilty of the facts charged, recognizing that the defendants dealt with legal affairs and that he was guilty of the facts of the judgment by recognizing that I dealt with legal affairs.
2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, including the statement made by the Defendants to the investigation agency at the lower court, Defendant A provided the following: (a) around August 201, 201: (b) around the Incheon Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan Building Building 302, 303, and 304 (hereinafter “instant store”); (c) on September 2, 201, the date of the instant store auction; (d) on September 2, 201, Defendant A prepared for an auction bid deposit with KRW 27 million and met with the Defendants in the coffee shop near the Incheon District Public Prosecutor’s Office; (b) Defendant B presented the minimum price of the instant store to the Defendants and the Defendants on behalf of the request for the purchase at the above place; and (c) the Defendants proposed that the minimum amount of the bid price plus the minimum amount of the bid price; and (d) K made a move to the Incheon District Court by phone call after the discussion about the purchase price and made a report to the Defendant under the name of the Incheon District Court.
In addition, the defendant B introduced the expert purchasing agent upon the request of the investigative agency to give up the bid for the store of this case and to receive the successful bid, and confirmed the accurate information, and then completed the successful bid.