Residence

[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 18 others

When the defendant fails to pay the above fine, the defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for the period converted into one day.

32,00,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

The amount equivalent to the above fine and the additional collection charge shall be ordered to be paid provisionally.

The Defendant, from April 30, 201 to January 28, 201, was in charge of duties related to the relocation of the site for the main office of the Seoul Special Police Agency, while serving as the guard of the Seoul Special Police Agency and the police officers belonging to the police officers (security guards). From around 2002, the Defendant received the money as the consideration for granting B a business license for the construction of a new shopping mall site for the main office of the Seoul National Police Agency. However, while the project for the relocation of the site for the main office of the Seoul National Police Agency was not carried out smoothly, the Defendant did not grant B the business license for the new shopping mall.

Since then, on February 2010, the Defendant told B to allow B to resume the operation of the mobile phone at the following places: “At present, the Defendant entered into an MOU project with the Manae-Sae-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa

On May 2010, the Defendant continued to be issued a check of KRW 32,00,00,000 (one thousand,000, KRW 32,000 Check) in the coffee shop where the name of Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government is unknown. The Defendant received from B a total of KRW 32,00,00,00 in the name of the grant of the ‘business right to the construction of a new shopping mall site in Seoul National Police Agency' from B.

Accordingly, the defendant accepted a bribe in relation to his duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The prosecutor's statement concerning B and the police's statement;

1. The prosecutor's statement concerning ○○;

1. Application of the detailed statement of transactions (No. 26 No. 5 of the evidence list), check copies, and Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 2(1)3 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 42 of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 10259, Apr. 15, 2010) (Concurrent imposition of fines pursuant to Article 2(2) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes)

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 and 6 of the Criminal Act

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70 and 69(2)1 of the former Criminal Act (Amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014)

Article 134 of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The scope of punishment;

Imprisonment between June and June, and fine of 32,00,000 won or more than 80,000, 000 won or more, 000, and 2. Scope of the recommended punishment based on the sentencing guidelines;

From 3 to 5 years of imprisonment;

3. Determination of sentence;

Imprisonment for three years and fine for negligence 40,000,000

The crime of this case is very poor because the defendant, who was a police officer in charge of transferring the site of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency, received KRW 32,00,00 as a consideration for granting a new business right. Such a crime is a serious damage to the fairness and purchase of police officers' duties and the trust of the general public. As such, it is necessary to punish the defendant with severe penalty corresponding to the act and responsibility.

However, it appears that the defendant led to the confession and reflect of the crime of this case, and that the defendant was subject to a disposition of suspension of indictment twice, and that the defendant was the first offender who has no record of criminal punishment, etc. shall be considered in determining the term of punishment under favorable circumstances. Other factors such as character, character, environment, family relationship, social ties relationship of the defendant, background of the crime of this case, circumstance of the crime of this case after the crime, etc., are comprehensively considered in light of various sentencing conditions as shown in the arguments of this case,

Mentality;

Judges Go-man