2. The Defendants are not guilty. 3. The summary of the judgment of innocence against the Defendants is published.

A. Defendants 1) The amount of money received by the Defendants as stated in the facts charged is merely a loan, and even though it is not a bribe received in connection with Defendant A’s duties, the lower court accepted the facts charged in this case and convicted the Defendants. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below against the Defendants is too uneasible.

2. Determination

A. The facts charged 1) Defendant A, including the Defendants’ identity, is a public official who has been in charge of tendering for construction works ordered by the above division from around December 17, 2008 to the Jananananan Military Office disaster management division. Defendant B is the F Co., Ltd. established for the purpose of civil engineering works, etc. (hereinafter “F”).

Defendant B’s representative director. On the other hand, around February 9, 2009, F, a small river maintenance project equivalent to KRW 11,350,00,000, which was ordered by the Jinan-gun Disaster Management Department, was ordered to be executed by a negotiated contract, and the construction project equivalent to KRW 74,360,000 from the above date to March 19, 2010 was ordered to be executed seven times in total from Jinan-gun-gun by a negotiated contract. around March 22, 2010, F, from around February 9, 2009 to March 22, 2010, ordered a small river construction project equivalent to KRW 55,260,000 of the total construction cost by competitive bidding, from around 129,620,000 of the construction cost ordered by the Jan-gun Disaster Management Department and the total construction cost ordered by the Jan-gun-gun Disaster Management Department to March 22, 2010.