1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of Defendant A’s appeal in light of the relevant legal principles and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, was justifiable to have found Defendant A guilty of the charge of acceptance of bribe on the two and two different occasions among the charges in the instant case against Defendant A.

Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there is no error of law by misapprehending the legal principles on the degree of proof required in a criminal trial or the judgment criteria of bribe in the crime of bribery, which is beyond the limit of free evaluation principle in violation of logical and empirical rules.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of Defendant B’s appeal in light of the relevant legal principles and the evidence duly admitted, it is justifiable for the lower court to have maintained the first instance judgment that found Defendant B guilty of the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds indicated in its reasoning.

Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there is no error of law by misunderstanding facts beyond the limit of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of receiving political funds illegally.

3. On the grounds of the prosecutor’s appeal, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty on all of the charges on the following grounds: (a) of the instant facts charged, the violation of the Political Fund Act against Defendant A, the violation of the Local Public Officials Act, the violation of the Election of Public Officials Act, the acceptance of bribe due to 10 million won in secret and flood; and (b) there was no proof of a crime regarding the grant of bribe due to the Defendant C’s non-defluence and the delivery of KRW 10 million in cash.

In light of the record, 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, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

4. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.