A. The Defendant did not have received a bribe of KRW 4 million from F on November 7, 2014.

B. The punishment of the lower court (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of the execution of two years, and the fine of eight million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Fact-misunderstanding 1) The lower court determined as follows: (a) according to each of the evidence in its holding, the Defendant operated to supply the heat for medical use sold by G to H’s senior citizens center; (b) purchased KRW 39,993,00 in the budget for the special subsidy for financial resource adjustment allocated to H from E to H; (c) the Defendant was involved in the foregoing budget allocation; and (d) the F transferred KRW 12,305,00 in return for delivery from G on November 5, 2014 to withdraw KRW 12,30,000 in the next day; and (d) the Defendant released KRW 4 million in the envelope; and (d) the Defendant sent F in the vicinity of S around November 16:4, 2014 to the wife; and (d) the Defendant also drank “N cafeteria” in the future operated by H at the time of the Plaintiff’s and the Defendant man in the city.

The facts stated as “the person stated,” and F stated to the effect that “the person was returned the envelope left by theO on the same day,” and theO stated to the effect that “the person was informed F of the place where the envelope was installed with the money, although the person was not memoryd accurately at the same time,” and that F sent the bag containing KRW 4 million to the Defendant at the same time, following the Defendant’s vehicle in this Court and the prosecution, “I am back to the toilet of the above restaurant building,” and, at the same time, the bag containing KRW 4 million to the Defendant.

The F’s statement to the effect that the F’s statement on the date, time, place, circumstance, etc. of the above 4 million won is very specific, consistent with objective data on the point of withdrawal and the point of call with the Defendant, etc., and that “the Defendant was carrying the inside of the open structure restaurant as a toilet that is not used by any other person at the ordinary level of damage, and the Defendant was issued a plastic bag.”