A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of two years and six months and by a fine of thirty million won.

A. Defendants 1) and misunderstanding of the legal doctrine, Defendant A’s defense counsel’s written opinion on April 10, 2018 submitted to this court by Defendant A’s defense counsel was also included in the assertion that there was a misunderstanding of facts as to the acceptance of bribe No. 2, the demand for bribe No. 3, and the fraud No. 5 as indicated in the lower judgment.

However, at the fourth trial date of this court, Defendant A and the defense counsel acknowledged the acceptance of bribe in the part of KRW 14 million, which was received as the expense for examining the thesis among the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below, and clarified that they only dispute about the acceptance of bribe in the part of KRW 44,90,000, which was used as the expense for practical training (the purport of disputing the part concerning the demand for bribe in the criminal facts of KRW 3). The assertion of facts about the fraud of Article 5 of the criminal facts in the judgment of the court below was withdrawn.

1) Lease fees received by the Defendant related to Paragraph 1 of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below are merely “futuress” received as courtesy from graduate students, not bribe.

This part of the argument is not included in the grounds for appeal by the defense counsel, and it does not constitute legitimate grounds for appeal, but it is judged that it is included in the written opinion submitted separately by the defendant A.

2) The lower court, related to Articles 2 and 3 of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below, accepted a bribe of KRW 58,900,000 in total, 31,000,000, under the pretext of an examination of the thesis as shown in the table 2 of the crime committed in the attached Table 2, and under the pretext of an examination of the laboratory.

However, the money used as the expense for the examination of the thesis among them was 14,000,000 won and remaining 44,900,000 won were used as the expense for the examination of the thesis.

However, the money that the Defendant received as laboratory habits was actually used as experiment material costs, laboratory animals purchase and management expenses, and academic publication fees, etc., and the Defendant did not personally use it, and did not provide unfair convenience in return. Therefore, 44,90,000 won used as laboratory habits can be deemed as a bribe.