뇌물공여등
[Defendant E] All appeals filed by Defendant and Prosecutor are dismissed.
[Defendant F] The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant E (1) The Defendant’s statement that the Defendant provided 25 million won to the Defendant as a bribe is in lack of specification and consistency, which is not consistent with objective circumstances, and is highly probable to make a false statement, such as the Defendant’s malicious testimony or the mitigation of the A’s criminal punishment, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this part of the facts charged, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. (2) The sentence of imprisonment (the community service order of 1 year and 6 years of suspension of execution, 3 years of suspension of execution, 120 hours of collection, 25 million won of the penalty) imposed by the lower court of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant F1) Even though the amount of a bribe received by the Defendant from A is not more than five million won, but not more than three million won, the lower court recognized the amount of the bribe of the Defendant as five million won by misunderstanding the facts. (ii) The sentence imposed by the lower court of unfair sentencing (an amount of penalty of four months of imprisonment, one year of suspended execution, and five million won of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
C. Defendant K’s sentence (a prison term of one year, a suspended sentence of two years, a community service order of 80 hours, a penalty of 13 million won) imposed on the Defendant by the lower court is too unreasonable.
Defendant
L1) In fact-finding, the Defendant: (a) expressed his intention to end the Mapo-gu Council Speaker election and to return money and valuables because K actively refuses money and valuables; and (b) returned the money and valuables thereafter to K as they are, despite the absence of his intention to obtain a bribe, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case by misunderstanding the facts; (b) the sentence imposed by the lower court of unfair sentencing (the penalty of four months of imprisonment, one year of suspended execution, and three million won is collected) is too unreasonable.
E. The prosecutor 1) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, there is a mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal principle, and Defendant E has the implementation of AM redevelopment project from AJ.