직권남용권리행사방해등
All appeals are dismissed.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. On the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor, the lower court acquitted Defendant A of the instant facts charged on the ground that there was no proof of crime regarding the part concerning abuse of authority and obstruction of exercise of rights and obstruction of use in relation to Defendant A in 2015, and outdoor advertising industry and outdoor advertising, and each of the bribery parts, violation of the Farmland Act relating to Defendant B’s BD response 3,892m2, each of the offering of bribe, and each of the offering of bribe against Defendant H.
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and the record, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the crime of abusing authority and obstructing another’s exercise of rights, the crime of offering bribe
2. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant A, B, C, and H, the lower court convicted the said Defendants of the facts charged (excluding the part not guilty and the part not guilty in the reasoning) on the grounds as stated in its reasoning.
The judgment below
In light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the establishment of a crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, contrary to the grounds of appeal.
3. According to the records as to Defendant D’s grounds of appeal, the above Defendant asserted the misapprehension of legal principles as well as unfair sentencing as grounds of appeal, while appealed against the judgment of the first instance court, and asserted the misapprehension of legal principles on the first trial date of the lower court and only the ground of appeal on the grounds
. In such cases.