변호사법위반등
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.
150,909,091 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.
Criminal facts
1. The Defendant in violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act was a person who, from November 1, 1990 to the present day, actually runs Q Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “P”) established for the purpose of production and installation of P in 113 of the N in Building 113 in Ansan-si, Ansan-si, a local newspaper (hereinafter “O newspaper”) located in the 305 N in the building of Ansan-si.
Around September 2009, Ansan-si decided to carry out a total of 103 replacement works located in Ansan-si in 2010, the amount of construction cost of approximately 810,000,000 construction cost by compiling-si.
Around September 2009, the Defendant came to know the above facts and instructed S, a representative in the name of Q, the Defendant actually operated, to be paid a certain portion of the construction amount in return for receiving the above construction work, because he knows many public officials in Ansan-si and, in particular, he could receive the above construction work because he knows the public officials in charge, etc. well.
S around that time, for the purpose of U production and installation in T in Yangju-si, is 'V' or 'V'.
W, who is the representative director, delivered the contents of the order from the Defendant, required that W be selected as the execution company of the above construction work, and that W, in return, demanded W to transfer a certain portion of the construction cost to Q account.
After that, on April 29, 2010, Ansan-si recommended V to the Public Procurement Service as a free contract for the R replaced Construction Project and completed the construction work around December 2010.
The Defendant, as above, received KRW 20,000,000 from the account of Q National Bank around September 17, 2010 as a reward for the selection of V as a negotiated contract for R-Replacement, and received KRW 190,00,000 from Q corporate bank account around the 28th day of the same month, respectively.
Accordingly, the defendant committed a violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act in collusion with S.