[2] In a case where a public official provided an opportunity to participate in speculative projects as a bribe, the timing of acceptance of the crime of acceptance of bribe

[3] The meaning of the duty in the crime of bribery

[4] The case holding that the crime of bribery is established on the ground that a member of the local council receives money or other valuables in relation to the election of the chairman of the local council

[2] In a case where a public official provided an opportunity to participate in an speculative project as a bribe, the timing of acceptance of the crime of acceptance of bribe shall be deemed to be the time the act of participating in the speculative project is terminated, and even if no benefit exists due to the participation in the project, unlike the initial expectation, due to a change in economic circumstances, etc. after the act is terminated, the establishment of the crime

[3] In the crime of bribery, a public official's duty includes not only the duty under the control of the law, but also the act closely related to the duty, or the act under the custom or the actual jurisdiction, and the act under the control of the person who can assist or affect the person who made the decision.

[4] The case holding that a crime of bribery is established since a local council, according to the provisions of Article 42 (1) of the Local Autonomy Act, shall elect the chairman by an secret vote among the members of the local council, in a case where a soldier who has the right to vote in the election of the chairman receives money and valuables in relation thereto, it shall be related to his duties as a soldier.

A. In the crime of bribery, the term "profit which is the content of a bribe" includes not only money, goods, and other property interests, but also all tangible and intangible interests sufficient to meet human needs, and it also constitutes an opportunity to participate in speculative projects (see Supreme Court Decision 94Do129, Nov. 4, 1994). In such a case, the timing of acceptance of the crime of acceptance of bribe shall be deemed to be the time when the act of participating in speculative projects is completed, and even if no benefit was gained due to the participation in the project, unlike the originally anticipated expected due to the change in economic conditions, the establishment of the crime of acceptance of bribe shall not be affected.

Examining the court below and the first instance court's evidence admitted by the court below, it can be sufficiently recognized that Defendant 1, 2, and 3 purchased the forest of this case with an opportunity to purchase the forest of this case where Defendant 5 thought that the future development gains will occur, and accordingly, Defendant 1, 2, and 3 purchased the forest of this case. Examining the above facts in accordance with the legal principles as seen above, even if no development gains accrued from the forest of this case, unlike the expected purchase time, the above Defendants 1, 2, and 4 received money from Defendant 6 in relation to the election of the chairman of the local council of this case, and it is clear that Defendant 1 and 2 used it for their business, and Defendant 4 returned the amount equivalent to the above Defendant 6 after the election of the chairman of the local council of this case was completed, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the crime of acceptance of bribe, nor in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the crime of acceptance of bribe against Defendant 2, as alleged in the ground of appeal.

The ground of appeal on this point is without merit.

B. In relation to the crime of bribery, a public official's duties include not only the duties under the control of the law, but also the duties closely related to the duties, or the duties under the custom or the actual jurisdiction of the decision-making authority, and the duties that may assist or influence the decision-making authority (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 98Do3697, Jun. 15, 200; 99Do5753, Jan. 19, 2001); and Article 42 (1) of the Local Autonomy Act, since the local council is required to elect the chairman by an secret vote among the members of the local council, if a military official who has the right to vote in the election of the chairman receives money, etc. in relation thereto, it shall be related to the duties of a military officer. Therefore, the decision of the court below on this point is just and there is no violation of a misapprehension of the legal principles as to the duties related to the crime of acceptance of bribe.

Defendant 1 and 2’s ground of appeal on this point is without merit.

2. As to Defendant 6’s ground of appeal

According to the records, although the above defendant delivered a bribe of KRW 13 million and KRW 15 million to the non-indicted 1 and defendant 3 with the intention to give a bribe for support in the election of the chairman of the military council, the judgment of the court below that the above non-indicted 1 and 3 kept the above non-indicted 1 and 3 as the intention not to give or receive it, but returned to the defendant 6 is just and there is no violation of the rules of evidence, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that the above money should be collected from Defendant 6 because it is not possible to confiscate the money to be used for the above bribe, is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles on additional collection or the legal principles on the crime of bribery.

The ground of appeal on this point is without merit.

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

Justices Song Jin-hun (Presiding Justice)