The part concerning Defendant B, C, D, E, and A shall be reversed, and this part of the case shall be remanded to the Seoul High Court.

1. Judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor

A. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, the identity of the facts charged shall be determined individually on the basis of the same factual relationship, which is the basis of the facts, in light of the basic point of view. In a case where only the date and time are different between the first facts charged and the modified facts charged, if there are circumstances to deem that the two facts charged are compatible in light of the nature of the case, the basic facts cannot be deemed identical.

However, if a crime of one party is committed, if the other party's crime is closely related to that of the other party to the extent that it cannot be established, the other party's basic facts are the same.

(2) As to the offering of a bribe, which is the primary charge against Defendant A, Defendant B’s violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Bribery), Defendant C, D, and E’s acceptance of bribe, the lower court rejected the prosecutor’s application for changes in the indictment from “within July 2006 to “from June 30, 2006 to July 1, 2006,” and dismissed the prosecutor’s appeal on the grounds that there is no proof of criminal facts.

(3) However, it is difficult to accept the lower court’s rejection of the prosecutor’s application for changes in indictment.

The following circumstances revealed by the records, namely, Defendant A, G, and F, all of Defendant G delivered KRW 100 million to Defendant F under the name of case expenses for Defendant B, C, D, and E, and they make a statement with the assent of all of Defendant B, C, D, E, and F.