A All appeals filed by the Defendants and prosecutor are dismissed.

A. The punishment of Defendant A (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) against Defendant A is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts (A) ① Defendant A did not receive a total of KRW 120 million from Defendant B and M Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “M”) Defendant C in the course of receiving a total of KRW 120 million from Defendant C of Defendant B and M Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “I”), but did not undergo the same procedures as a result of the resolution at the general meeting of the association or the board of directors’ resolution; ② most of the above KRW 120 million received by Defendant A is not for the association but for the general meeting service (O/S) to be elected as the head of the association; ③ Defendant A was used for the personal purpose of the association; ③ was not deposited with the association’s account under the name of the head of the association or with the account under the name of the Defendant’s own name; in light of the fact that Defendant B and C received money from the passbook and did not specifically explain the details of the receipt of money and valuables.

B) In light of the statement of Defendant B, C, the content of “Agreement on Construction of Reconstruction Project (MOU)” prepared by Defendant A and Defendant B, and the process and name of the receipt of the instant money and valuables, etc., the said KRW 120 million received by the Defendant A constitutes a bribe as the money that was granted without the intent to receive a refund by Defendant B and C. (2) Each sentence against the Defendants of unfair sentencing (Defendant A: 1 year of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution, 6 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution, and 2 years of suspended execution) on the Defendants of the lower court is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The lower court’s determination on the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts is as to whether the person receiving money or goods is Defendant A). In full view of the legal principles and the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court.