특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(배임)등
The judgment below
The guilty part against Defendant C is reversed.
Defendant
C A person shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.
except that this shall not apply.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Although Defendant B (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and improper sentencing, etc.) was indicted for the purport that Defendant B introduced Defendant B to Defendant C, the lower court recognized Defendant A, AD, and AG’s telephone conversations without undergoing an amendment to the indictment, as criminal facts. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the principle of incompetence.
2) The receipt of KRW 100 million by Defendant B, a wife of Defendant B, from Defendant C, is merely a loan of the above money from Defendant C, not paid by Defendant B, but is not granted as a broker for the business selection process of X project “X project” (hereinafter “project”) in 2016 (defensives and legal principles) (defensives). 3) Even if Defendant B’s act was found guilty, the lower court’s sentencing (a punishment of imprisonment of five years and fine of KRW 100 million, penalty of KRW 100,000) is unreasonable.
B. Defendant C (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and misunderstanding of sentencing) (1) was true that Defendant C remitted KRW 100 million to AE, which is the wife of Defendant B, but it was merely lent KRW 100 million to AE due to purely constituting, and not paid to Defendant B under the pretext of mediating the selection procedure of the business operator in 2016 (misunderstanding of facts and legal principles) (2) even if Defendant C’s act was found guilty, the lower court’s sentencing (2) is too unreasonable (an unfair sentencing) even if it was found that Defendant C’s act was guilty (2).
The prosecutor (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and misunderstanding of legal principles) 1) as to Defendant A’s violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (hereinafter “AC”), it is unreasonable to recognize the Defendant not guilty of this part of the charges, even though the above Defendant gave preferential treatment to Defendant AC Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “AC”) to be selected as a subsidized project operator in 2016.
B) As to the leakage of confidential information against Defendant A in the course of performing official duties, the above Defendant.