A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and three months.

189,605,00 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

A. In light of the legal principle, since the instant public prosecution does not distinguish the total cost and unit cost construction from the one related to the receipt of money and other valuables, it cannot be seen that the Defendant received money and other valuables or entertainment under the pretext of providing convenience to certain construction works. Thus, the facts charged was not specified to the extent that it is impossible to exercise the Defendant’s right to defense. 2) The lower court acknowledged that the remaining Defendant, who converted the burden of proof in violation of the presumption of innocence with respect to the correlation between the delivery of money and other valuables, etc. and illegal solicitation, received money

B. Fact-finding 1) The defendant paid part of the labor cost or construction cost to be paid by F to L on or around October 2, 2006, which was deposited by F to the account, on behalf of L, a creditor, and although the defendant did not receive money from F in return for an illegal solicitation, the court below acknowledged it as a breach of trust acceptance (related to No. 1 of the crime list attached to the judgment of the court below) by the defendant as a result of the defendant's receipt of a breach of trust (related to No. 1 of the crime list attached to the judgment of the court below) on or around January 19, 207, and 4 million won from F on or around February 22, 2007, although it was received from F, it was merely received at the value of rice rice with the beginning of the year and name, and even though the defendant did not receive money from F in return for an illegal solicitation, the court below acknowledged it as a breach of trust acceptance.

(Attachment No. 2 and No. 3 of the judgment of the court below) Defendant: (a) Defendant received KRW 10 million from F on July 4, 2007, and KRW 24 million from F on November 2, 2007; and (b) Defendant received KRW 20 million from F on or around November 2, 2007; (c) notwithstanding that Defendant did not receive or borrow money from F in exchange for an illegal solicitation, the court below acknowledged that Defendant received each of the above money upon receiving an illegal solicitation from F (as shown in the judgment of the court below No. 4 and No. 10).