2. Determination

A. Defendant A had the attitude of recognizing all of the instant crimes and against his mistake in the trial, and the Defendant returned money equivalent to the amount of his accepted bribery to K and C. This does not constitute “return of bribe prior to the commencement of an investigation,” and thus, it cannot be deemed as a special mitigation factor of the crime of acceptance of bribe as provided by the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court Sentencing, but the Defendant’s attitude of reflection may be inferred.

The fact that the defendant has no criminal records and criminal records exceeding the same criminal records and fines, some of the accepted amount of the accepted amount due to the crime in this case is deemed to have been used as business promotion expenses, etc. by the superintendent of the Office of Education of the I Office of Education for about 25 years, and the defendant seems to have served faithfully as a public official for about 25 years, such as being given official commendation twice, and the defendant's family who needs support due to the defendant's detention seems to face economic difficulties.

However, the Defendant provided convenience, such as putting the main part of the Office of Education’s Office Superintendent at the Office of Education’s Office of Education and informing the persons concerned of internal information, etc. obtained by using his status, and provided them with money and valuables and entertainment for several months directly or through B. The criminal nature of the crime is poor, such as receiving money and valuables and entertainment from them, and the number of times the Defendant received entertainment reaches 18 times, and the amount that the Defendant received reaches 30 million won in total, B up to 1383 million won in total, and the Defendant committed the instant crime from the motive for raising business promotion expenses of the Office of Education at the Office of Education.

(b)if any;