A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (unfair sentencing) (two years of imprisonment and three years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence sentenced by the prosecutor (unfair sentencing) by the court below is too unfasible and unfair.

2. The lower court: (a) taken into account the following factors: (i) the Defendant’s unfavorable circumstances; (b) the instant crime was committed in a serious manner; (c) the purchase of the outcome of the business that the tax official handles; and (d) the public trust in society on it; (d) the State’s failure to impose and collect taxes; and (e) the substantial amount of money and valuables acquired by the Defendant for the purpose of committing a bribe is a considerable amount of KRW 24.2 million; (b) the circumstances favorable to the Defendant; (c) the Defendant recognized the instant crime; (d) the Defendant’s actual delivery of the money and valuables acquired to the tax official; (e) the Defendant returned the money and valuables acquired to the associates of the teaching staff; (e) the Defendant returned the bribe amount of KRW 14 million to the associates of the teaching staff; and (e) the first offender with no record of criminal punishment; and (e) comprehensively taking into account all the sentencing conditions, including the Defendant’s age, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (e)

In full view of the factors and sentencing criteria as shown in the sentencing review process of the lower court, the lower court’s judgment exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion.

shall not be assessed.

B. In addition, there are no circumstances to recognize that the lower court’s maintenance of the lower court’s sentencing judgment is unfair, considering the circumstances that the lower court had already taken into account while determining the Defendant’s punishment.

Therefore, the argument that the sentencing of the defendant and the prosecutor is unfair is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the defendant.