In light of the fact-finding or misunderstanding of legal principles: the Defendants entered into an employment contract with O Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “O”) for the convenience of street-based activities, and concluded an employment contract with O Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “O”) to arrange for the services of O for the convenience of the company’s ordinary business, and received compensation without involvement in the company’s ordinary business, but the lower court did not recognize it solely for the reasons indicated in its holding, and thus found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged in this case. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the act of mediating a violation of the Act

Judgment

A. The content of the facts charged is that Defendant A was dismissed from office as a member of the Council and K on October 10, 1996, and Defendant B was removed from office on June 19, 199 from office while serving as J and L on the Construction City State of Seosan City on June 19, 199, and Defendant C retired from office on December 31, 2008 as Ma when indicating “Gun” (hereinafter “Gun”).

The Defendants, using that they had connection and influence with public officials of Chungcheongnam-nam and its affiliated local governments (hereinafter referred to as “ Chungcheongnam-Nam, etc.”), provided information related to orders so that N may receive services, such as design, etc. related to river construction ordered by Chungcheong, etc., from public officials in charge of Chungcheongnam-Nam, etc., and received money from N in the name of “business expenses” under the pretext of a regular “monthly wage” and occasional necessity.

1. The Defendant, around June 9, 2008, is a public official in charge of Chungcheong, etc., so thatO may receive orders from Chungcheong, etc. based on a formally concluded contract as if he/she works as a "chairperson" at an O office in Hongsung-gun P.