209Gohap257(Joint)b. Abuse of official authority and obstruction of another’s exercise of rights

209, 405(combined)(C) of bribery to a third party

(d) Violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act;

Residential air conditioning Dong at Residential Time

Dong-dong at the time of resident registration;

2.b.C. 500 (540308-180432), representative director

Residential Moyang-dong

Private land at the time of residence in the place of registration

d. Large-Scale Construction Co., Ltd. (17141- 00210)

Residential Gu Residential Gu Residential Gu Residential Gu 710

Representative Director 100

Attorney Jin* (Defendant 100, and for the comprehensive forest construction of Daelim Co., Ltd.)

2. The above defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for the period of 50,000 won converted into one day if he did not pay the above fine.

3. Provided, That with respect to defendant gambling, the execution of the above punishment shall be deferred for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive;

4. A penalty of KRW 16,000,000 shall be collected from the head of an office for gambling of Defendant.

5. The charge of abuse of authority, obstruction of exercise of rights, and offering of a third party’s bribe among the facts charged against Defendant Park Jong-dae and Park Jong-young is not guilty.

1. Acceptance of bribe against Defendant 2;

From August 30, 2004 to February 27, 2008, Defendant Park Jong-il worked as the place of the water supply and drainage facility and took charge of the comprehensive planning and coordination of the administration of the water supply and drainage facility in the permanent city, including the establishment, expansion, maintenance, management, and maintenance of the basic plan for the water supply and drainage facility and the maintenance of the facilities, and the first BTL project (total construction cost of KRW 65.76 billion) that was promoted as the competent authority in the permanent city from around 2005 in relation to the "the first BTL project (total construction cost of KRW 6.576 billion)" that was concluded with the Ministry of Environment, etc. around May 31, 2005, and around January 17, 2006, the Director General of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry has been in charge of the maintenance and improvement of the water supply and drainage facility and other water supply and drainage facility construction work.

A. On July 2006, Defendant YN received cash of KRW 10 million and accepted a bribe in relation to his duties to the effect that he would not give disadvantage to scco construction in relation to the above BTL construction from the maximum level of employees in charge of official duties, who are the representative of scco construction (hereinafter “scco construction”) at his office located in 332 Escco construction (hereinafter “Scco construction”) at the time of permanent residence around July 2006, Defendant YN, who received cash of KRW 10 million from the scco construction;

B. Around June 2008, Defendant 2 received cash of KRW 6 million from the above maximum to the same effect at the office of the Director General of the Agricultural and Forestry Construction Bureau for the resident viewing in the male Dong 140-3 at the time of resident stay, and received a bribe in relation to his/her duties.

2. Violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act by Defendant 100

Defendant 10 is the representative director of the Daelim General Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Tlim General Construction”) and, as the representative director of the Defendant Daelim General Construction (hereinafter referred to as the “Tlim General Construction”), there was an intention to evade corporate tax and value-added tax by appropriating the wages not paid to the non-standing and temporary employees of the Defendant Daelim General Construction as if they were paid the wages, or by concluding double contracts with the subcontractor.

(a) Fiscal year, 2004;

Defendant 10 reported and paid corporate tax for the fiscal year of 204 (1. 1. - December 31, 2004) of the Daelim General Construction in the Resident Tax Office around March 13, 2005 (2004. - December 31, 2004). Despite the fact that he did not work as a non-standing employee or temporary employee of the Daelim General Construction during the above taxable period, Defendant 100 paid wages to the Jungju, despite the fact that he did not have paid the said wages, Defendant 1 paid 17,480,000 retirement pay and retirement pay 1,485,850 won to the Jungju's wage account as if he did not immediately withdraw the said money and immediately returned it to the company, and did not account as if he paid the said wages and retirement pay normally, Defendant 204 declared and paid the said amount of tax to 36 non-standing employees, corporate tax, corporate tax 791,747, 2506, 4616.

(b) Fiscal year, 2005;

(1) Value-added tax;

On January 25, 2006, Defendant 100 reported and paid value-added tax for 2005 period 2,005 (2.7. 1, 2005 - December 31, 2005) (2005) at the resident tax office for large-scale construction (25,000,000 won was paid at the resident tax office for large-scale construction). Since Defendant 100 in the above taxable period is in need of funds to pretend that the provisional payment would have been made from the company before the company, Defendant 50 in addition to the above tax amount due and other unlawful acts by filing a false tax base and amount of value-added tax on the resident tax office based on the false accounting, Defendant 50,500,000 won was added to the above tax item due and other unlawful acts for use in raising the funds.

(2) Corporate tax;

Defendant fixed0 filed and paid corporate tax for the fiscal year of the 2005 General Forest Construction ( January 1, 2005 - December 31, 2005) at the permanent tax office around March 31, 2006;

The accounting process shall be conducted with an excessive appropriation of KRW 125,00,000 to the cost of payment in connection with the payment of the cost of the work for the Youngcheon-cheon Construction, the cost of the work for the head of the sewage terminal in the Nakdongdong, the cost of the work for the head of the Gu, and the cost of the work for the payment of the cost of the cost

Despite the absence of the fact that the classical police officer did not have paid wages to the classical and temporary employee of the 11,977,643 won of wages during the pertinent taxable period, the amount of wages for 36 employees of the 372,240,595 won (372,340,595 won in indictments, but this is expected to be 372,240,595 won, retirement allowances, 594,540 won in total, 396,835,835,130 won in indictments (396,935,935,130 won in indictments) as if he paid wages to the classical police officer as if he paid wages of 11,97,643 won to the classical police officer, which was immediately withdrawn and returned to the company as if he had paid the above wages normally during the said taxable period as if he had paid the above wages to the classical officer.

On the basis of such false accounting, the tax base and tax amount of corporate tax were under-reported and under-paid, and the payment deadline of the above tax item has expired, thereby evading the total amount of corporate tax 113,875,290.

(c) Fiscal year, 2006;

(1) Value-added tax;

Defendant fixed0 on January 25, 2007 for the return and payment of value-added tax for 2006 period of 2006 of the large-scale forest construction ( July 1, 2006 - December 31, 2006) at a permanent tax office around January 25, 200;

A. Accounts are dealt with as if no tax invoice was issued using the pre-determined Comprehensive Construction Contract and no tax invoice was issued despite the occurrence of KRW 576,090,910 of the proceeds from construction in large-scale integrated construction, which was conducted in part of the construction works of the Cheongjin Integrated Construction Project, which was ordered by the New Jin Comprehensive Construction Project during the said taxable period, and as if the said proceeds did not accrue;

The accounting shall be conducted with the amount of the construction cost paid as a subcontract for the development of 195,200,000 won in the actual amount of the construction cost paid as a subcontract for the development of Docheon-gun, Sungcheon-gun, a part of the Changcheon Village Sewerage Sewerage Construction in which the Docheon General Construction was awarded, for the construction of Docheon-gun, and for the construction of Docheon-gun, the amount of construction cost paid as a subcontract for the development of Docheon-gun, which was awarded as part of the Docheon Village Sewerage Construction:

Based on these false accounts, the value-added tax base and tax amount are less returned and paid, and the payment period of the above tax items has expired, and the total amount of value-added tax was evaded by fraud or other unlawful acts.

(2) Corporate tax;

Defendant fixed0 filed and paid corporate tax for the 2006 fiscal year of the 2006 General Forest Construction ( January 1, 2006 - December 31, 2006) at a permanent tax office around March 31, 2007;

G) Not account of 576,090,910 won from the proceeds of construction in connection with the construction of the Cheongri Power Station, such as the open port of the above (1) during the said period;

(1) as referred to in paragraph (1) above, include the cost of construction paid in relation to the civil works of literature transformation stations and civil works of 195,200,000, and 67,567,680,000,000,000, in excess of the cost of construction paid in relation to the civil works of Changcheon Village Sewerage in Sung-gun, Sung-gun;

C) keep accounts of 15,640,00 won (in the indictment, stated as KRW 2,836,340,000, which is not paid to the Gangwon-do Governor during the above taxable period, as if it were paid in KRW 15,640,00), as if it were paid in KRW 15,320,580, the amount of retirement pay was immediately withdrawn and returned to the wage account, and as if it was paid in normal terms, the amount was immediately returned to the company and the amount was settled as if it was paid in normal terms, and for the same period, the amount of wages of KRW 424,89,048,00 for 41 non-regular workers and temporary workers for the same period;

Despite the progress of 74,00,000 won in the construction cost for the period of the above taxation period, the accounting of 44,000,000 won as if it were received as the construction cost, shall be made falsely as follows:

Based on the above false accounting, the corporate tax base and tax amount were under-reported and paid, and the payment deadline of the above tax items passed, thereby evading the total amount of 322,549,660 won of corporate tax due to fraud or other unlawful acts.

(d) Fiscal year, 2007; and

(1) Value-added tax;

A. In filing and paying value-added tax on January 1, 2007 (the date of January 1, 2007 - June 30, 2007) at the Residential Tax Office around July 25, 2007, Defendant fixed a portion of the disposable Construction Works, which was ordered to be newly constructed during the said taxable period, with the prior agreement to not issue a tax invoice and to issue a new comprehensive construction and tax invoice despite the occurrence of KRW 274,545,450 of the construction proceeds in spite of the occurrence of KRW 274,545,450 of the construction proceeds during the said taxable period, Defendant fixed the tax base and tax amount of value-added tax by falsity and after payment of the said tax amount by falsity and after the payment period of the said tax item by fraudulent or other unlawful acts.

Defendant 100, on January 25, 2008, reported and paid value-added tax for 2007 period 2007 ( July 1, 2007 - December 31, 2007) of the Grand General Construction in the Residential Tax Office, Defendant 100 in the Republic of Korea, as if he actually paid a portion of the construction cost paid for the Grand General Construction in the New Factory in the said taxable period, for the New Construction in the Bori Sea Construction in the Republic of Korea, he evaded KRW 38,00,000 on the basis of the said amount of value-added tax, after having reported and paid the tax base and tax amount less than the actual amount of the construction cost, and after the due date for payment of the said item of tax, he evaded KRW 3,800,000 due to fraud or other unlawful acts.

(2) Corporate tax;

Defendant fixed0 filed and paid corporate tax for the fiscal year of the 2007 General Forest Construction ( January 1, 2007 - December 31, 2007) at a permanent tax office around March 31, 2008;

The accounting process shall be conducted by omitting the proceeds of KRW 274,545,450 incurred in connection with the revolving construction works, such as the open paragraphs of the above paragraph (1);

(1) as described in paragraph (1) above, the accounting processing shall be made by appropriating the amount of the construction cost paid in connection with the construction of a factory with a plant with a plant with a revenue of KRW 38,00,000 in excess of the actual cost;

The amount of wages of KRW 2,606,740, which was not paid to the Gangwon-gu during the above taxable period, was transferred to the company, immediately withdrawn, and returned the above wages to the company as if it were paid in normal accounts, and the accounts were settled as if it were paid in full, and for the same period, the amount of wages of KRW 39,406,736, retirement allowances of KRW 25,294,762 for 424,701,498 (in the indictment, KRW 424,701,490) for 424,701,490, which was paid for 424,701,498 for 424,701,498.

Based on these false accounts, the corporate tax base and tax amount were under-reported and paid and the payment deadline of the above tax items passed, thereby evading the total corporate tax amount of KRW 189,681,850 due to fraud or other unlawful acts.

(e) Fiscal year, 2008;

Defendant 10 reported and paid corporate tax for the fiscal year 2008 of the 2008 Large-Scale Construction ( January 1, 2008 - December 31, 2008) in the permanent tax office around March 31, 2009 (the amount of wages 21,796,80, retirement allowances 2,162,390) of the 21,79,869,070 won (the amount of wages 274,569,45,454 won) of the 32 non-regular workers and temporary workers was stated in the indictment as if they were paid the wages and retirement allowances to the 21,796,9686,986,986,976,986,986,975,976,986,986,975,976,986,96,975,97,96,975,96,757,940 won).

3. Violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaderss Act by the defendant large forest construction;

Defendant Daelim Construction, a representative of the Defendant, evaded the corporate tax of 130,04, 120, 205, 200, 2005, 5,041,500, 113,875,290, 2006, 83,885, 8850, 2006, 322,549, 660, 200, 27, 4544, 207, 207, 327, 4540, 207, 207, 189, 208, 207, 200, 207, 207, 322,549, 60, 206, 207, 207, 327,540, 300, 300, 200, 207.

Summary of Evidence

[Each fact of No. 1 at the Time of Sales]

1. A part of the legal statement made by the defendant Park Poe-young;

1. Each legal statement of the witness standion, the maximum time limit, and Kim Dong-dong;

1. Each investigation report (to listen to the contents of CD recording, and to confirm the fact that the refund is made in the maximum amount of two million won);

1. Detailed statements of transactions by self-relianced deposit, and photographs of beverage boxes;

【Facts 2 and 3 at the Time of Sales】

1. Each legal statement of the defendant 100 and the representative director of Daelim Construction Co., Ltd. 1. The accusation of the director of Daegu Regional Tax Office;

1. A copy of the investigation report on the relevant suspicion of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, the analysis table by type of tax offense, and the details of benefits investigation;

The representative director of the revolving fund construction and the details of the use and return of the revolving fund, and the representative of the revolving fund for the revolving fund construction

A copy of the details of use and return, progress payment, use of profits and return status, and Cheonguri Power Station

progress payment, copy of the current status of use and return of profits, copy of the supporting document of set-off of provisional payments, 204

(Determination/Correction) Copy of the resolution, and the corporate tax base and amount of tax in 2005.

(Determination/Correction) Copy of the Resolution, and copy of the Corporate Tax Base and Amount of Tax (Determination/Correction) Decision, 2006;

Tax base and amount of corporate tax in 2007 (determination/revision) copy of the resolution, and the corporate tax base in 2008

and amount of tax (a copy of the decision correction resolution, a copy of the re-revision resolution of value-added tax for 205, 2006

1. A copy of each investigation report (a copy of the register attached to the suspect's data related to tax evasion, a copy of the statement of statement, and a copy of each investigation report;

A copy of each fact confirmation, copy of salary analysis, and details of false deposit appropriation)

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

* Defendant Park Jon: Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act (Appointment of imprisonment with prison labor);

* Defendant 50: Article 9(1)3 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (Selection of a fine)

* Comprehensive Forestry Construction Corporation: Articles 3 and 9(1)3 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

* Defendant Gabb: the former part of Article 37 and Article 38(1)2 of the Criminal Act (a heavier judgment of the criminal administration)

1. The crime: (a) The concurrent crimes with the punishment stipulated in the crime of acceptance of bribe under paragraph (1)

* Defendant 100, Large-Scale Construction Co., Ltd.: the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code, the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act

Paragraph 1

1. Detention in a workhouse;

* Defendant fixed00: Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Code

1. Inclusion of days of detention in detention;

* Defendant Gabb: Article 57 of the Criminal Code

1. Suspension of execution;

* Defendant Park Gyeong-dae: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as “the grounds for sentencing”), which is favorable to the Defendant;

Considering)

1. Additional collection:

* Defendant Park Jon: the latter part of Article 134 of the Criminal Code

Judgment on Defendant Park Jong-chul and Defense Counsel's argument

1. As to the crime of acceptance of bribe 10 million won in the judgment of Defendant Park Jong-young

A. The assertion

There is no fact that he received KRW 10 million from the lowest around July 2006, and only there is a little time of 2006 that the maximum market price saw 500 'ba 500' drinking water in his house and visited the personnel in relation to the progress of his business.

B. Determination

The first investigative agency made a statement that there was no money transaction with Defendant 1,00, and that this statement was made to 2,000,000,000 won (per 45 pages of evidence), but it was made to 2,000,000,000,000 won, and Defendant 1,000,000,000 won, and 7,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,000,00,00,00,00,00,00.

의 진술이 사실임을 뒷받침하는 유력한 증거라고 하겠다. 또한 포스코건설의 현장 소장이던 김동석은 수사기관에서 최으 와 대질조사를 받으면서 처음에는 최스로 부 터 피고인 박 @ @에게 1,000만 원을 전달한 사실을 보고받은 적이 없다고 진술하다가. 최ㅇㅅ가 피고인 박 @ @ 에게 1,000만 원을 전달하고서 한두달이 지나서 현장소장실에서 차를 마시면서 보고하였음을 주장하면서 당시의 상황을 구체적으로 진술하자. 사실은 최시가 2006. 9.경 사무실에서 커피를 마시면서 '박 @ @에게 1천을 주었고 개인 돈으 로 주었으니 보충해 달라'는 취지의 말을 하였으나 이는 최시가 자신에게 사전 보고 없이 한 것으로, 본사윤리규정에 어긋나서 회사 차원에서 보충해 줄 수 있는 것도 아 니어서 화를 내었다고 진술하고 있어최시의 진술이 사실임을 뒷받침한다. 그리고 피고인 박 @ @ 은 판시 범죄사실 1.나 항의 600만원 수수 부분과 관련하여 그 돈을 받은 사실 자체는 인정하고 있는데, 그 받은 장소와 관련하여 수사기관에서 검사와 구두면 담 당시에는 자신의 집에서 받았다고 하였다가(증거 기록 1권 453쪽), 제3회 피의자신 문에서는 사무실에서 받았다고 진술을 번복하였고, 그 후 제4회 피의자신문 이래 이 법정에 이르기까지는 위 600만 원을 받은 장소가 자신의 집인지 사무실인지 헷갈린 다 고 하고 있다. 그런데 피고인 박 @ @ 이 최이스로부터 돈을 받은 것이 판시 범죄사실 1. 나 항의 600만 원 수수 사실 한 번 뿐이라면 , 그 돈을 받은 장소가 어디인지 헷갈린 다 는 것은 상식적으로 납득하기 어려운데, 이는 결국 피고인 박 @ @ 이 최 시로부터 1,000만 원을 자신의 집에서 받은 사실이 있음에도 이를 부인하려다 나온 변명들이기 때문인 것으로 보인다. 따라서 피고인 박 @ @ 및 변호인의 위 주장은 이유 없어 받아들 이지 아니한다.

2. As to the crime of acceptance of bribe of KRW 600,000,000,000,000

A. The assertion

It is true that 6 million won has been delivered from this city, but among them, 5 million won has been delivered as the activity expenses of the Do Do Do Cheong's Do Cheong's Do Cheong's Do 's Do 's Do 's 's '' and has been used for

B. Determination

According to the statements at the investigation agency and this court of the highest city, the strong detention and Kim Dong-dong stated that the maximum market price of the defendant Park Jong-ju shall be invited to pay 6 million won as stated in its reasoning. At its expense, Sscco also 5 million won, and that it would be better to deliver the oil value to the defendant Park Jong-soo through the highest city. However, it is consistent with the statement that the sum of the oil value would have been delivered 6 million won in total to the defendant Park Jong-dae, while the defendant Park Jong-dong was sent 6 million won in prison. In relation to the above money's place of use, the defendant Park Jong-dae offered the above money to the employees who had been engaged in the activities as the Cheong-dong team to use it for the expenses of the meeting, and there is no proof that the above money was used for the expenses of the meeting.

그런데 이처럼 피고인 박 @ @ 이 구두로 최이에게 지원을 부탁하였고,최시가 영 수증 처리도 없이 피고인 박 @ @에게 은밀하게 이를 전달하였으며, 피고인 박 @ @ 역시 특별한 증빙자료 없이 이를 사용한 것 등에 비추어 보면, 위 600만 원은 모두 최시 가 피고인 박 @ @ 개인에게 준 것이지 상주시에 기부한 것은 아닌 것으로 보아야 한다. 그리고 피고인 박 @ @ 이 최ㅇㅅ에게 그와 같은 지원을 요청할 수 있었고 최ㅇㅅ가 그에 응했던 것은 피고인 박 @@ 이 당시 상주시청 농림건설국장으로 도로, 상하수도시설, 동 업시설 , 기타 구조물 등의 유지 ·관리 ·설치 업무를 총괄하면서 포스코건설이 시공하고 있던 이 사건 상주시 하수관거정비 1차 BTL 사업에 직 ·간접적으로 영향을 미칠 수 있 는 지위에 있었기 때문인 것이므로, 위 돈의 수수와 피고인 박 @ @ 의 직무와의 관련성 을 부정할 수는 없다. 따라서 직무관련성이 없다는 피고인 박 @ @ 및 변호인의 위 주장 은 이유 없어 받아들이지 않는다. 다만 피고인 박 @ @ 이 그 돈을 상주시의 도청유치활 동과 관련하여 사용하였다는 것은 뇌물의 사용방법과 관련된 사정이므로 뒤에서 보는 것처럼 피고인 박 @ @ 에 대한 양형에서 참고할 사정일 뿐이다.

Reasons for sentencing

Defendant Park Jong-il received a lot of bribe twice from a construction business site agent as a senior public official. However, the permanent address is a small local government that has served for local residents faithfully for 35 years or more, and thus the local public confidence in the fairness and integrity of official duties has been significantly impaired, and as a result, the local public confidence in the same public official’s self-esteem has also been damaged. Accordingly, Defendant Park Jong-il has no choice of imprisonment with labor heavier than the prescribed one. However, the amount of money and valuables received in one letter cannot be deemed to be significant, and it appears that it was actually used for the same purpose. The first offense, which was first committed for the sake of local residents faithfully for 35 years or more, and that the entire execution of the sentence should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the important facts of the crime committed while being detained for 5 months or more. As a result, Defendant Park Jong-il’s punishment and the total execution of the sentence should be determined to be subject to punishment as a whole.

The part not guilty (the abuse of authority and obstruction of exercise of rights against Defendant Park Jong-dae and Park Jong-young), the third party offering of a bribe; 1. Summary of the facts charged

BTL business is a method of public-private partnership projects for the construction and operation of infrastructure, and it is a method of constructing and operating infrastructure through the inducement of private investment so that private project operators selected by the State or local governments invest funds and transfer the ownership of the infrastructure facilities to the State or local governments at the time of construction completion, but the project operator recognizes the right to manage and operate the infrastructure for a certain period of time to lease the infrastructure facilities to the State or local governments during the period of possession of the management and operation right.

On September 12, 2005, the evaluation committee for the order of the above BTL project selected 16 members of this scco construction, large comprehensive forest construction, culp construction, culp construction, culp construction and treatment construction (the shares ratio shall be 30%, 30% of sculco, 20% of sculum, 20% of sculum, 20% of sculty 20% of sculum, 25% of the shares ratio in corporation), 15% of the National Pension Management Corporation, etc. as financial investors, and entered into the above sculpy concession agreement on January 17, 2006.

On the other hand, the above consortium member companies concluded the "Joint Contract Operation Agreement" which selects Spanco construction as a main company to represent the consortium. According to the above agreement, the state secretary is granted external power of representation and exclusive execution right, and independently deals with the business consultation with relevant agencies such as competent authorities, such as contracting companies, the selection of subcontractor companies and the decision of subcontract terms and conditions, and the execution of funds, etc., but among the consortium companies, he/she has the status of the sole contractor who is solely responsible for all the liabilities related to the project. However, in the case that the rest of the consortium member companies other than the daytime are allocated profits and losses according to the investment ratio, and in the case of failure in the weekly business due to the bankruptcy of the company, they assume the responsibility for the completion of the construction project according to their respective shares in relation to the ordering agency.

Therefore, the sewage culvert BTL project is a construction project for which a consortium's main contractor is responsible for the sole construction right.

However, in collusion with Defendant Park Jong-soo and Park Jong-soo, Defendant Park Jong-soo, who was decided to be the main company of the above BTL project around January 2006, the Defendant Park Jong-soo was willing to assist the construction of construction of large-scale construction in the future, and the Defendant Park Jong-dae was asked to cooperate in securing the right to construct the scco construction on a street by utilizing a separate relation between the resident residence and his own own, with a separate relationship with the supervisory office that has a significant influence on the profits and losses of the construction company around January 2006, and Defendant Park Jong-dae requested the head of the water supply and sewerage construction of large-scale construction, which is the senior executive office of the construction of large-scale construction, and Defendant Park Jong-dae requested to cooperate in the construction of the scco construction of the scco construction to the head of his own bureau at the time of residence, and Defendant Park Jong-dae's request to present the scco construction of the scco construction of the above scco construction site at the site.

The Spanco Construction demanded the transfer of the construction right under the cooperation and support of the resident-owned government office, which is the supervisory office, and if not accepting it, it was judged that there is a high possibility that the proceeds of the construction will worsen due to the excessive exercise of the supervisory authority at the time of residence and the delay of the air, etc., and even if there was a high possibility that it will even be a hostile construction. However, the demand that the construction company transfer the construction right itself, which is the private property right of the construction company, was strongly rejected because it is no example in the construction industry

On March 1 to 4, 2006, Defendant 100 asked the person concerned with Posco Construction to exercise a strong pressure once, and Defendant 1 asked the person concerned with Posco Construction to exercise the construction right more strongly. At around that time, Defendant 2 demanded Posco Construction to do so in the above office, Kim Dong-dong and the Masco Construction to do so. Masco Construction will yield. Masco Construction will be 'Ssco Construction' and 'Ssco Construction will be granted to the person concerned with Posco Construction' in the above office. At around May 2006, Defendant 2006, Defendant 10 requested Posco Construction's general construction work at the above office, a regular manager in charge of Posco Construction, to cooperate with the person concerned with Posco Construction in the process of exercising the construction right, such as requesting Posco Construction to cooperate with the person concerned with Posco Construction.

Accordingly, the above Park Dong-dong, Kim Dong-dong, the tear et al. decided to transfer half of the construction rights of sco construction to sco construction to scoste general with the approval of the head of civil engineering and environmental project headquarters, the highest decision-making authority of scos construction related to the above BTL project by taking advantage of the management who judged that the ability to perform scos construction will be deteriorated due to the increase in construction costs and delay in air, etc. due to the excessive exercise of the right of supervision over scos construction at the time of residence if the defendant's request is continued.

Accordingly, on September 29, 2006, the Defendant Park (a) and Park Jong-soo (a) concluded an agreement with the said largest, etc. that "as to transfer 50% of the construction rights held by Masco to Masco to Masco Construction," and had the said BTL construction enter into a Masco integrated construction agreement, and had the said BTL construction right acquire the construction right equivalent to KRW 18.7% of the construction cost, including the construction cost for new interest treatment area (contract amounting to 5,231,974,000,000,000,000,000 total construction cost of KRW 6.5.7 billion, including the construction cost for new interest treatment area (contract amounting to 5,231,974,000,000,000 won), excluding the joint performance amount of materials, equipment, design, etc.

이로써 피고인 박 @ @, 정00은 공모하여, 공무원인 피고인 박 @ @ 의 직권을 남용하여 위 최시 , 김동석 , 박근동, 김익희 등으로 하여금 위 BTL 사업의 시공권 중 54.7 % 를 대림종합건설에 넘겨주게 함으로써 의무 없는 일을 하게 함과 동시에 위와 같이 위 최 ㅇㅅ 등 포스코건설 관계자들로부터 피고인 박 @ @ 의 직무와 관련하여 불이익을 받지 않고 편의를 봐 달라는 취지의 부정한 청탁을 받으면서 대림종합건설에게 위와 같이 BTL 사업의 시공권을 넘겨주게 함으로써 제3자에게 뇌물을 공여하게 하였다.

2. Claims by Defendant Park Jong-dae and Park Jong-young

Defendant Park Jong-dae did not have the right to manage and supervise the above BTL business, and requested the Ssco Construction to cooperate with the local business entity to return a large number of days in accordance with the initial business objective or the corrective policy of the above BTL business, and Defendant Park Jong-soo was able to participate in the above BTL business. Defendant Park Jong-soo did not request or conspired to exercise the right to execute the construction on the part of the Ssco Construction.

3. Determination

A. The facts charged of this case are based on the premise that construction works are executed in excess of 54.7% of the construction cost of the exclusive subcontract for the construction project, and that construction works are executed in the same manner as that of the exclusive subcontractor for the construction project, because construction project is a consortium with large-scale subcontractor for the construction project and with treatment of the company for the construction project, and all responsibility related to the construction project were solely borne by the subcontractor for the construction project, and that the subcontractor for the construction project has a separate right to select a subcontractor for the construction project with the same portion of the construction cost as that of the exclusive contractor for the construction project. However, according to the evidence duly adopted, a subcontractor for the construction project with the same method as that of the exclusive subcontractor for the construction project and the comprehensive construction project with the same authority as that of the exclusive subcontractor for the construction project, a subcontractor for the construction project with the same authority as that of the exclusive subcontractor for the construction project and the comprehensive construction project with the same authority as that of the exclusive contractor for the construction project can be selected as a subcontractor for the construction project.

However, there is a fact that the content of its authority has been given special status to large-scale construction on some part of the project, unlike the internal agreement between large-scale construction and large-scale construction, depending on which the entity originally participated in the agreement. The facts charged in the instant case are the result of the abuse of authority by Defendant Park Park Jong-soo, and it seems that it is the core that this constitutes a case where a bribe is given as it gives a bribe to large-scale construction as it gives a benefit to large-scale construction who is a third party in return for an illegal solicitation and as a result, it seems that it constitutes a case of giving a bribe. Accordingly, in the instant case, the term "transfer of the construction right" is deemed to be only an expression "transfer of the construction right" as a different expression of the granting of such special status.

B. First, Defendant 2’s act constitutes the crime of abusing authority and obstructing another’s exercise of rights and obstructing another’s exercise of rights.

1) According to the evidence duly admitted and examined, a small and medium-sized construction company's construction site's construction site's construction site's construction site's construction site's construction site's 0% of the total construction site's construction site's total construction site's 0% of the total construction site's construction site's total construction site's 0% of the total construction site's construction site's total construction site's 0% of the total construction site's 0 construction site's total construction site's interest and 0% of the total construction site's construction site's construction site's construction site's 0% of the total construction site's construction site's interest and 0% of the total construction site's interest, but the total construction site's interest and 0% of the total construction site's investment site's construction site's construction site's construction site's 0th of the total construction site's 0th of the total construction site's interest. However, if the construction site's 0th of the construction site's interest.

The following circumstances revealed through the fact of recognition, i.e., Grand General Construction was refused to request that it be allowed for it to execute all construction works, and Defendant Park Jong-chul Construction to request or request that it be allowed for it to execute a large scale comprehensive construction and scoo-conscil construction. During that process, the name of large scale comprehensive construction was specific and the name of large scale construction and the demand was made. Accordingly, it is difficult to determine that the demand of scoo Construction was based on the request of large scale construction and the demand of 0 large scale construction, and that it is difficult to determine that the demand of scoo-conscu construction was a substantial demand for the public official to stay in the area of scoo Construction. As such, it is difficult to view that scoo-conscu construction as a public official who requested 00 or more active measures to activate the local government construction.

2) However, in relation to the crime of abuse of authority under Article 123 of the Criminal Act, abuse of authority means a case where a public official entrusts a public official with an exercise of authority on matters belonging to his general authority and authority, and practically, specifically, unlawful and unreasonable acts are committed. In other words, in the formal and external context, it means a case where a public official appears to perform his/her duties, but its substance means an act other than legitimate authority, and accordingly, the abuse of authority is distinguishable from a tort using his/her status where a public official performs an act that does not fall under his/her general authority (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Do9139, Apr. 10, 2008; 90Do280, Dec. 27, 1991).

Therefore, in this case, the issue is whether the request or request was made by the competent authority to allow the construction of a large comprehensive forest construction to Defendant Park Jong-soo, because it does not correspond to the general duties of the head of the competent authority. If the request or request made by the head of the competent authority for the said request or request by the head of the competent authority, it would be possible to constitute a tort using his status, but it would not constitute a abuse of authority under Article 123 of the Criminal Act.

However, the above BTL project is designed to maintain sewage culvert facilities at the time of residence with the introduction of private capital and technology. It is basically implemented in accordance with the "Public-Private Partnership Agreement" which entered into on January 2006 by the clean owner. It is the project implementer (Article 6 of the above Convention) who is the subject of the clean owner under the above BTL project. The competent authority is responsible for administrative support, such as authorization, implementation plan, work supervision, confirmation of completion, etc. in the above BTL project (Article 1 of the above Convention). The Environmental Management Corporation is entrusted by the competent authority with the right of management and supervision related to the above BTL project (Article 34 of the above Convention). It is not possible for the competent authority to order the project implementer to implement the project or to revise or remove any clean construction project, which is a public-private partnership project established for the implementation of the project or any other public-private partnership project, or to order the competent authority to revise or remove any project to its original state or public-private partnership project (Article 6 of the above Convention).

Thus, even if Defendant Park Jong-dae requested or asked to transfer part of the construction right to the large-scale comprehensive construction in relation to the selection of a subcontractor, this cannot be deemed to have exercised the authority over the affairs that fall within the scope of the duty as to the private request or request using the status of the head of the competent authority as the head of the department.

However, in light of the facts charged, Defendant Park Jong-dae’s abuse of authority can be said to have taken into account the fact that he/she did not cooperate at the permanent address of the competent authority in connection with various civil petitions and design modification issues that may arise in the process of construction, or that he/she exercised excessive supervisory authority in the process of construction, thereby bringing disadvantages to Switzerland construction. Therefore, the part that abused this authority may be said to have taken into account the fact that he/she abused this authority.

However, even based on evidence duly admitted, it does not seem that the competent authority, as the head of the competent department of the instant BTL, exercised excessive supervisory authority over the instant BTL project, to give disadvantage to Posc construction, or to exercise pressure. However, according to some statements made by the investigation agency of Kim Dong-dong and the largest, there is a statement to the effect that the construction was delayed due to the pressure of Poscul, but according to this court’s testimony and other evidence, it was difficult for Poscul comprehensive construction to request the transfer of the construction right to the Poscul and to discuss the construction site, and thus, it was necessary for the Poscul Construction to participate in the construction site and to participate in the construction site in the construction site by the Poscul Construction to the extent that it was not necessary for the Poscul Construction to participate in the construction site of the Poscul Construction to the extent that it was not necessary for the Posculor to participate in the construction site or to participate in the construction site.

3) In addition, even if there was Defendant’s ex officio abuse of authority, this paper examines whether there was a causal relationship between the outcome that interfered with the exercise of the right by the Poco Construction as above. In order to deem that the Defendants’ above abuse of authority constitutes the crime of abusing authority and obstructing another’s exercise of rights, the Defendants’ act of abusing authority by Defendant Park Park’s abuse of authority would have infringed on the victim’s freedom of decision-making on the Poco Construction, and as a result, it should be recognized that the Poco Construction transferred the instant execution right to the Poco Construction to the Poco General.

According to the evidence duly adopted, a person who had a final authority to decide on the instant section of construction at Spoco Construction with the owner of the construction project at issue was responsible for the above section of construction at issue, and the head of Spoco Construction at the site and his/her representative demanded the transfer of all construction rights to the head of Spoco Construction at the site of construction at the site of construction at the site of construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction project at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of 50% of the construction at the site of the construction at the site of the construction.

위 인정된 사실에 의하면 피고인 박 @ @ 이 포스코건설의 현장관계자들에게 대림종합 건설의 요구를 들어주도록 이야기한 것이 포스코건설의 현장관계자들에게 심리적인 부 담을 주었고( 이 점에서 피고인 박 @@ 이 포스코건설 현장관계자들의 의사결정의 자유를 침해하여 그들로 하여금 의무 없는 일을 하게 한 것이었다고 볼 여지는 있을 것이다), 그 결과 포스코건설의 내부적인 의사결정과정에서 대림종합건설의 요청과 관련된 논의 가 진지하게 이루어지게 된 것임은 부정할 수 없을 것이다. 그러나 전체적으로 본다면, 컨소시엄 참여업체인 대림종합건설이 포스코건설 영업팀의 공사 수주시의 언질을 들어 공사에의 참여를 요구하고 있어 주간사인 포스코건설로서는 원만한 공사 수행을 위해 어느 선에선가 대림종합건설과의 타협이 불가피한 상황이었고, 그 같은 상황하에서 포 스코건설의 의사결정권자들은 피고인 박 @ @ 이 개인적인 의도에서 그 같은 요구를 하였 다는 사정을 알지 못한 채로, 주무관청이자 관할 지방자치단체인 상주시의 지역업체 배려 요청이 있고 이는 지역경제 활성화 차원에서 통상적으로 있을 수 있는 요청이므 로 그에 응해서 지역업체를 공사에 많이 참여시키는 것이 향후 원만한 공사 수행에 도 움이 된다는 점과, 아울러 민원이 발생할 여지가 높은 난구간의 공사를 지역업체인 대 림종합건설의 책임 하에 수행하게 하는 것이 현실적으로도 유리할 수 있다는 점을 함 께 고려하여 시공권의 일부를 대림종합건설에게 양도하게 된 것으로, 이는 경제주체로 서의 포스코건설이 제반 사정과 요소들을 합리적으로 판단하여 스스로에게 가장 유리 하다고 생각하는 방향으로 주체적으로 판단한 결과일 뿐이고, 피고인 박 @ @ 의 직권남 용으로 말미암아 의사결정의 자유가 침해되어 나타난 결과는 아니라고 할 것이며, 설 사 포스코건설의 의사결정권자가 그 판단 과정에서 시공권 양도 요청의 주체나 의도에 대해 착오를 일으킨 부분이 있었다고 하더라도 달리 볼 것은 아니다.

Therefore, in this respect, the abuse of authority and obstruction of another's exercise of rights are bound to be acquitted.

C. Next, we examine whether the Defendant’s act of 00 constitutes the crime of offering a third party’s bribe.

In the crime of offering a bribe to a third party under Article 130 of the Criminal Act, the purpose of the crime of offering a bribe to a third party is to prevent the scope of punishment from becoming unclear, and such "illegal solicitation" is to not only by an explicit or implied expression, but also by an implied expression. However, in order to establish that there is an illegal solicitation by an implied expression of intent, there is a common perception or understanding between the parties as to the content of the execution of duties, which is the object of solicitation, and the fact that the money and valuables provided to a third party are a quid pro quo for the performance of their duties, and it is difficult to view that there is an illegal solicitation by an implied expression of intent in cases where money and valuables have been provided to a third party by other motive unrelated to such recognition or understanding, or by other motive irrelevant to the performance of duties (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do6950, Jan. 30, 209).

However, as seen earlier, in light of the circumstance that Defendant Park Jong-soo’s employees at the construction site of Macco Construction referred to as the State on the ground of the demand for large-scale construction, and the circumstances and reasons behind the transfer of part of the construction right to construction from Macco Construction to Macco Construction to Macco Construction, it is difficult to view that there was an explicit or implied solicitation between Macco Construction and Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Macco’s Do.

4. Conclusion

Thus, since each of the above facts charged against Defendant Park (a) and Park Jong-soo constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime, it shall be pronounced not guilty pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Su Dong-young

Freeboard accommodation