It is merely an arrangement for the compromise between R and N Council members, not an arrangement for the interruption of the request for inspection to NF banks.

Although the defendant alleged in relation to the nature of the money received KRW 40 million fromO, he/she received KRW 20 million from N members to deliver his/her attorney's fees, and the remaining KRW 20 million is paid in relation to the relationship with O as local community activity expenses, etc., so it does not receive the above money as to the arrangement of matters related to N's parliamentary activities as a member of the National Assembly.

The punishment of the court below (one year of imprisonment, additional collection of 40 million won) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The defendant was the representative director of P in relation to the subject matter of mediation of determination on the assertion of mistake.

The author argues that the compromise between R and N is only arranged by N and N, but does not arrange for the suspension of the request to N and V bank.

The defendant asserted the above purport in the court below, and the court below rejected the above argument in detail over 8 to 10 pages of the decision of the court below.

Examining the following facts based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below on the circumstances stated by the court below, the court below’s aforementioned determination is justified.

In the end, this part of the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

① From around 2010, N has continuously raised suspicions on P. Since around 2011, N requested an audit by the Board of Audit and Inspection of V banks in relation to P. The Defendant, on October 16, 2012, immediately before receiving the initial request from theO, issued the report data on the title “BC” (Evidence No. 160, 174). (2) P and V banks need to follow the aforementioned suspicions, request for inspection, etc.