(a) Violation of the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes;

(b) Bidding interference;

(c) Offering of bribe;

Residence, Busan Shipping Daegu 00 Dong

Busan District Court Decision 00 Eup

2.Na.Mo○, Inc.

00 Eup/Myeon 1,000

Busan District Court Decision 00 ○○ Eup

3.b.(c) Yellow 00, 000 Representatives

dwelling of Busan Northern-gu 00 dong

(At present ○○ Detention Center Replacement)

Standard place of registration 00 square meters

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 and 3 others (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorney Park Jae-soo, Counsel for defendant-appellee)

Attorney Seo-young (for the defendant Kim ○-○)

Law Firm Jinsu (For the purpose of Defendant 1 to ○○)

Attorney Lee Dong-hoon, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

If the above defendant fails to pay the fine, the above defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for a period calculated by converting 100,000 won into one day.

30 million won shall be additionally collected from the above defendant.

To order the above defendant to pay the amount equivalent to the above fine.

2. Defendant KimO shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

If the above defendant fails to pay the above fine, he/she shall be confined in a workhouse for a period calculated by converting 50,000 won into one day.

To order the above defendant to pay the amount equivalent to the above fine.

3. The defendant shall be punished by a fine of 10 million won.

If the above defendant fails to pay the above fine, he/she shall be confined in a workhouse for a period calculated by converting 50,000 won into one day.

To order the above defendant to pay the amount equivalent to the above fine.

From January 1, 2003 to January 28, 2010, Defendant 100 served as the chief of the machinery department of the first power plant department of the High Atomic Energy Headquarters (the name was changed to the machinery department of the technical room of April 16, 2003, and the name was changed to the technical team of January 30, 209) of the High Atomic Energy Headquarters under the Korea Atomic Energy Co., Ltd. (the name was changed to the technical team of January 20, 201). The above machinery team leader was promoted to the head of the above machinery team on January 29, 2010 and worked until January 8, 2012, the person in charge of the maintenance, repair and ordering of the valves, etc. from May 14, 2007 to January 29, 2009 to the Busan High Court of 200, the machinery team leader of the machinery team of March 21, 2008 to the Busan High Court of 200, respectively.

1. “2012 Gohap206” - Defendant Lee ○○

A. On December 2, 2005, the first power plant of the Korea Atomic Energy Headquarters: (a) imported from a foreign country in accordance with the implementation plan for research and development of high-ri 1 and 2 high-developed valves in Korea; (b) decided that 35 high-developed valves in Korea, such as 32 high-developed valves and spare 35 motors, which were used in the operation of the 2nd nuclear power plant, were selected as a research and development enterprise; (c) the said power plant entered into a contract with 000 million high-developed valves in two installments around March 2, 2006 and around January 2, 2007; and (d) concluded a contract with 100,000 high-developed valves in the supply of 10,250,000 high-developed valves from around 20,000 to around 10,3100 high-developed valves in the supply of 200,000 supply of the 2nd public-developed valves in a negotiated contract.

Around April 201, the Defendant and Kim○○ issued an instruction to prepare items of assessment of standard bidding assessment in favor of 0000, to the head of the machinery team division Kim○○, who is a subordinate employee, to prepare items of assessment of standard bidding assessment in favor of 12 supply, with 15 years' work experience, 15 years' work experience, 15 years' work experience, 17 companies affiliated with a research institute, 277, 100, 200's work experience, 200's work experience, 30's work experience, 30's research institute, 177, 200's work experience, and 30's work experience, 10 years' work experience, 177, 200's work experience, 200's work experience, 37, 200's work experience, and 20's work experience, 200's work experience.

Around June 22, 2011, ○ Co., Ltd. was determined to be disqualified due to lack of points in the standard examination, and the contract was awarded in 0000 which successfully passed the standard examination, which led to the above Defendant’s bid process in collusion with Kim 00 and Yellow ○○.

B. The violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery) was established from around 2006 to around 2010 under a negotiated contract for the supply of an empty valve motive, ordered by the machinery team at the first power plant team at the Gori Atomic Energy Headquarters from around 2006 to around 201. The supply contract for an empty valve was amended from the existing negotiated contract to the bidding method, and around April 8, 2011, the 12 supply of an open valve motive was announced. The Defendant ○○ around the end of April 12, 201, around 200, 10 million won was a total of 3 million won of the public corporation’s public official who received 2 million won from the above public official under the pretext of giving and receiving a bribe from the above public official under the pretext of an auditor’s indication of the above contract and the bid for the above bid from ○○ in Busan-gun, Busan-gun, ○○○○.

2. “2012 Gohap264 - Defendant Kim ○○, and yellow ○○

A. Defendant KimO-O-O co-principal - The First Power Station of the High Atomic Energy Headquarters: (a) concluded a contract for the supply of an empty valve 1 and 2 in accordance with the implementation plan of research and development for the localization of an empty valve 1 and 2 in a foreign country; (b) decided to domesticize 35 empty valves 32 and spare 35 as a research and development enterprise; (c) the above power plant divided into two parts on March 2, 2006 and on January 2, 2007; (d) concluded a contract for the supply of an empty valve 530,500,000 won and one empty valve 30,000,000,000 won from the expiration date of the contract for the supply of an empty valve 1 and 2 in a foreign country; and (e) concluded a contract for the supply of an empty valve 200 to the expiration date of the contract for the supply of an empty valve 300,000 from the expiration date of the contract;

Around April 201, the Defendant and this○○○○ issued an instruction to prepare items of assessment for standard bidding in favor of 000 the Defendants, with a view to the fact that only the companies with certain points obtained by adding up points assigned according to the items of assessment indicated in the standard bidding report, are eligible to receive price assessment by means of a concurrent bid with prices and specifications separated by 11-0240-01. Around April 201, the Defendant and this○○○○ issued an instruction to prepare items of assessment for standard bidding in favor of 000 so that only 15 years of work experience, 15 years of work experience, 20 business-affiliated companies with research institutes, and 20 years of work experience, 1.6 days of the above Defendants’ participation in the bid at ○○○○○○ 20% of the above items of assessment for standard bidding, and the above Defendants’ participation in the bid at 00% of the above items of assessment for standard bid.

B. Defendant 100 - The offering of a bribe ○○○○○, as described in the above paragraph (a) from around 2006 to around 2010, concluded a supply contract for an empty valve motive, which was ordered by the mechanical team at the first power plant team at the high nuclear power plant headquarters from the above paragraph (a). The supply contract for an empty valve was amended from the existing negotiated contract to the bidding method, and the bid was announced on April 8, 201 for the supply of 12 an empty valve motive. Defendant Yellow ○ around the night of April 12, 201. Defendant 1: (a) around the middle of the short period of time, Defendant 10 million won was granted to this ○○○○ on the pretext of an auditor’s indication of the above contract, and on the pretext that it can be awarded a successful bid in the said bid; and (b) around the end of the first of the same month, around the first of the same month, Defendant 20 million won was granted to this public corporation’s employees and employees.

Summary of Evidence

[판시 제1의 각 점] (증거기록은 부산지방검찰청 동부지청 2012년 형제14747, 15072, 16474호임) 1. 피고인 이○○의 이 법정에서의 진술 1. 검찰 작성의 장00, 김OO, 박○○, 김○○에 대한 각 진술조서의 각 진술기재 1. 검찰 작성의 각 수사보고(피내사자 이○○의 토지 취득 내역 및 취득 경위 등 보고 | 구매시방서 첨부 - 고리1발전 기계팀 김○○ 작성 / '이OO' 관련 계좌들에 대한 분석보고 / 이○○의 부동산매입자금 조성경위와 황○○의 현금출금내역과의 연관성 보고 / 황00이 이00에게 뇌물을 교부하였다는 장소 사진 등 출력물 첨부보고)의 각 기재 및 영상(첨부 서류 포함)

1. Entry (including attached documents) of an investigation report prepared by the prosecution (verification of the legal fiction of a public official);

1. Statement of a written evaluation of the standard tender document prepared by the defendant 200;

1. Each description of the contract rules enforcement rules, tender comparison table, tender specifications for the purchase of electric power plants in the High Atomic Energy Headquarters No. 1 nuclear power plant, specifications tender statement, document copy of personnel records (Evidence No. 579-580), technical specifications assessment statement, Tech Eva, standard tender statement, and copy of the results of evaluation of standard tender documents;

[Each point of No. 2] (Evidence Records are the copies of the 2012 Punishment No. 147, No. 15072, No. 16474) of the Busan District Prosecutors' Office, 2012. 1. Each statement made by Defendant Kim-○, and Yellow ○○ in this Court; 1. Each statement made by each prosecutor about the prosecutor's office's office's office's directors, new0, KimO, GaO, KimO, GaO, and Han-O

1. Each investigation report prepared by the prosecution (attached to the personnel record card of the internal investigation and the person involved in the case / Reporting on the acquisition of land in 00 and the process of acquisition / Attached to purchase specifications / Analysis and reporting on the accounts related to 'O' / 'O' / Reporting on the creation of gold funds by the purchaser of real estate in 00 and the relation between the creation of cash deposits by the purchaser of real estate in 00 / Yellow 00

each description and image (including attached documents) of the copy of the copy, such as the place of delivery, photograph, etc.

1. To describe (including attached documents) a copy of the investigation report prepared by the prosecutor's office (verification of the legal fiction of a public official);

1. A description of the written opinion on the evaluation of the standard tender document prepared by the defendant 200;

1. A copy of Tech, Food and Drug Arbitration, a copy of the tender announcement, a copy of the tender announcement, a copy of the tender announcement, a copy of the tender announcement, a copy of the tender announcement, a copy of the tender announcement, a copy of the tender announcement, a copy of the tender announcement, a copy of the tender announcement for purchase, a copy of the tender announcement, a copy of the tender announcement for purchase, a copy of the tender announcement for purchase, a copy of the purchase of a new-type valve in the high-ri one power plant, a copy of the contract enforcement manual, a copy of the tender documentation, a copy of the tender notification, a copy of the tender notification, a copy of the technical specification assessment report, and a copy of the technical specifications assessment report, respectively;

[The record of evidence] (No. 14747, No. 15072, No. 16474, No. 16474) of the Busan District Prosecutors' Office, 2012; 1. The copy of the first protocol of interrogation of the defendant YO prepared by the prosecution against the defendant YOO

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 315 and Article 30 (Selection-A) of the Criminal Code, Article 315 and Article 30 (Selection of Imprisonment with Labor for the crime of No. 1-A, and Selection of Fine for the crime of No. 2-A of the Decision)

○-B: Article 2(1)3 and (2) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 53(1) of the Act on the Management of Public Institutions, collectively: Article 133(1) and Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 53(1) of the Act on the Management of Public Institutions

1. Handling concurrent crimes;

Defendant Yellow ○○: the latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act (only between the crimes of each subparagraph of Article 2 at the time of sale and the first head of each judgment which became final and conclusive, the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

(1) Defendant 00: the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (within the scope of adding up the long-term punishment for each crime)

○ Defendant Yellow ○: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [the maximum amount of each crime shall be the sum of the amounts of concurrent crimes with the punishment specified for the offering of a bribe heavier than the punishment]

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Defendant ○○: Article 53, Article 55(1)3, and Article 55(1)6 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing)

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Additional collection:

Defendant 100: As to the crime of violation of the latter part of Article 134 of the Criminal Act (Bribery)

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The criminal facts of this case by Defendant Lee ○-○ are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act between the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery) for which the sentencing guidelines are set and the obstruction of bidding for

Scope of the applicable penalty in law / Imprisonment for 2 years and 6 months to 16 years, and fine for 30 million won to 75 million won (limited to cases of discretionary mitigation)

【Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery)】

[Determination of Punishment] Bribery, Acceptance of Bribery, Type 3 (not less than 30 million won, less than 50 million won)

[Special Contributors] - Aggravations: Improper Action related to Acceptance of Bribery, and aggressive Demand

[Scope of Recommendation for Special Adjustment] Aggravation, 4 years to 9 years

[General Aggravations] - Aggravations: Cases of high relevance to duties

- Reduction Elements: Quasi-public officials under Article 53 of the Act on the Management of Public Institutions (*), serious reflectivity, and no record of criminal punishment (the revised sentencing range) (the revised sentencing range) imprisonment for 4 years to 16 years and a fine of 30 million won to 75 million won) and imprisonment for 3 years and fine of 30 million won to ○○ was in charge of the supply and inspection of a nuclear power plant, a national key facility, but he knew that he was in charge of the supply and inspection of the nuclear power plant, but he did not know that he was in charge of it, and he did not know that 00 million won was in charge of the supply and inspection of the nuclear power plant, but he could receive 0 million won in the bid for the supply of the empty valve operation valve, a supplier, and set the evaluation items favorable to 0000 so that 0 million won can be awarded a successful bid, and that the above Defendant had actively demanded ○○○ and caused a significant risk to the Korean nuclear power company, which is a public corporation, and that he did not interfere with the instant bribe.

However, on January 24, 201, the Ministry of Strategy and Finance announced on January 24, 201, when the Korea hydroelectric Energy Corporation was converted from "other public institutions" to "market-type public corporations", it was deemed as public officials when the above defendant acquires property or property benefits in relation to his/her business from that time; the above defendant denied and reversed his/her crime in this court, and led him/her to repent his/her mistake; the defendant cannot be found criminal records; the above defendant cannot be found, and the above defendant seems to have contributed to the smooth operation and technological innovation of nuclear power plants for about 22 years; considering the above defendant's age and character, motive and behavior of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence shall be determined as per the order by leaving the scope of recommendation and taking into account all other circumstances that are favorable to the defendant.

2. Defendant Kim 00, who was sentenced to a fine of KRW 50,000,000 for a fine of KRW 50,000,000 for a fine of KRW 3 million

Although Defendant ○○○ is responsible for the supply and inspection of a nuclear power plant, which is a national key facility, Defendant 1 appears to have committed a crime, as well as character and behavior poor, since it appears that Defendant ○○ and Kim○, one of its subordinates, did not transfer her responsibility to ○○ and Kim○○, even though it caused the risk of considerable loss to the Korean hydroelectric Power Co., Ltd., a public enterprise, even though he was in charge of the supply and inspection of a nuclear power plant, he was aware that it was the subject of the lawsuit, and he was 000, a supplier, and set up the items of assessment in favor of 000 in a bid for the supply of an empty valve operation equipment.

The fact that the above defendant seems to be against the mistake of the defendant, and the fact that the defendant has no other criminal power, except for the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents in 198, seems to be favorable to the above defendant.

In light of such circumstances, the above defendant’s age, motive, means, and consequence of the crime, various circumstances constituting the conditions for sentencing as shown in the argument of the instant case, including the circumstances after the crime, shall be considered, and the sentence shall be determined as per Disposition.

3. The scope of punishment by a fine of KRW 50,00,000 to KRW 27,000,000,000 for a fine of KRW 10,000.

In full view of the fact that in collusion with the employees of the first power plant of the High Atomic Energy Headquarters, Defendant Yellow Energy Headquarters actively participated in setting the evaluation items in favor of 000 so that 000 operating by himself can be awarded a successful bid in a bid for the supply of an empty valves, thereby undermining the fairness of bidding, and that if the contract has been awarded as awarded as a successful bid, it would have been likely to have been engaged in a large amount of unjust enrichment if the contract has been implemented as a successful bid, and that the above Defendant paid a large amount of amount of 30 million won as a bribe to this ○○○ who is regarded as a public official on the ground of an auditor’s indication on the actual monopoly of the supply of an empty valve for the said power plant, etc., the character and conduct and crime seems to be very poor.The crime of offering of bribe in this case was actively demanded by this 00,000, which has the authority to decide whether to grant delivery of a 00 million won, and the above Defendant’s mistake is divided into one’s own fault, etc.

On August 23, 2012, the above defendant was sentenced to four years of imprisonment for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) and the violation of trust in Busan High Court on the same day, and the judgment became final and conclusive on August 31, 2012, the above judgment should take into account the case of being tried simultaneously with the above judgment. In addition, the above defendant's age and character, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc. are considered, and then the above defendant shall be punished by a fine in accordance with the order.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Cho Jong-chul

Judges Min Il-Gyeong