1. As to the prosecutor’s grounds of appeal, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment that acquitted Defendant D on the ground that there was no proof of crime regarding the receipt of bribe from Defendant D among the facts charged against Defendant D and the facts charged against Defendant E, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning.

Examining the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on business relationship and the consideration in bribery.

2. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant A, Defendant B, Defendant C, and Defendant E, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, the lower court convicted Defendant A and Defendant B of the offering of a bribe, on or around February 2015, which was conducted against Defendant C, the offering of a bribe, the facts charged against Defendant B, the facts charged against Defendant C regarding the offering of a bribe, and the facts charged against Defendant C, on or around February 2015, among the facts charged against Defendant C, the fact that the offering of a bribe was conducted on or around February 2015, the disclosure of confidential information

Examining the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on job relevance, quid pro quo, and disclosure of official secrets in the crime of bribery.

3. All appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.