On October 201, the Defendant received cash of KRW 10 million from the Korea Electric Power Corporation E Office located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F, which was issued by the Korea Electric Power Corporation GH to the effect that “the convenience of business evaluation and personnel management is changed,” and the Korea Electric Power Corporation GH received cash of KRW 10 million.

Accordingly, the defendant accepted a bribe in relation to the public official's duties.

B. On December 201, the Defendant received cash KRW 20 million from the Korea War Employees to the effect that the Korea Electric Power Corporation “Korea Electric Power Corporation would be able to promote to Grade I(B)” at the same place as the first patrol officer and the preceding paragraph, and that the Korea Electric Power Corporation GH would have “Korea Electric Power Corporation would be able to promote to Grade I(B).”

Accordingly, the defendant accepted a bribe in relation to the public official's duties.

2. Determination

A. There is no objective evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant received KRW 30 million in total from H twice. However, in the instant case where the Defendant denies the Defendant’s crime by consistently asserting that there is no evidence from the investigative agency to this court, the Defendant’s statement is the most direct evidence corresponding to the facts charged in the instant case and is the only evidence.

B. In the case of bribery, the defendant, who was selected as the accepter in the relevant legal principles, denies the acceptance of the accepter, and there is no evidence such as financial materials to support the acceptance of the accepter, there is not only the admissibility of evidence, but also the credibility to exclude a reasonable doubt. In determining the credibility of the statement, the defendant is not only his own rationality, objective reasonableness, and consistency before and after, but also his human beings.