뇌물수수등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year and by a fine of 50 million won.
Defendant
A The above fine shall be imposed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A: The lower court’s imprisonment with labor for a period of one year and six months and fine of 50 million won) is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant C: misunderstanding of legal principles and unreasonable sentencing 1) Defendant C explained on November 10, 2015, as indicated in the facts charged by Defendant C, the details of the proposal for the evaluation of H business, etc. However, the technology evaluation plan or the project explanation materials indicated in the facts charged are not the data classified by D as external expenses, and the contents of the proposal for the evaluation of the above H business cannot be deemed as “confidential” under Article 8 of the Korea Railroad Corporation Act as those known externally. Nevertheless, the lower court found Defendant C guilty of the facts charged against Defendant C was erroneous in misapprehending the legal doctrine on “confidential” under Article 8 of the Korea Railroad Corporation Act. (2) In so doing, the lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.
2. The crime of bribery of this case by Defendant A, which judged on the appeal of this case, is disadvantageous to the fact that the nature of the crime is not good in light of its circumstances and content, and that the social trust on fairness in the performance of duties and free competition in bidding has been damaged due to each of the crimes of this case.
On the other hand, Defendant A made confessions of all of the crimes of this case and reflects his mistake in depth, Defendant A deposited KRW 21 million which is the amount of accepted acceptance against the mineer B in the trial, Defendant A’s intention on the crime of interference with bidding of this case seems to be weak, Defendant A did not have serious damage to the result of bidding conducted by D due to the crime of interference with bidding of this case, and Defendant A was the first offender.
The above-mentioned favorable circumstances and other records of this case, such as Defendant A’s age, family relation, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of crime, and circumstances after the crime, are revealed during the trial process.