A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding the fact that the Defendant received money from AK is not the cost of employing regular teachers, but the personal loan is merely an individual loan. Nevertheless, there is an error of misunderstanding of facts in the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty. 2) The punishment sentenced by the judgment of the court of unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment and fine 40 million won) is too unreasonable.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

C. Around 2008, the public prosecutor (misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles regarding the bribery part of Defendant A) (the head of the P Office of Education planning and management support for the operation of the P Office of Education planning and management and the head of the private school support support shall assist the Defendant, who was the head of C, to allocate the budget of facility construction cost of KRW 4 billion to the J Schools, and in return, C employed the Defendant’s wife and two children

Therefore, the defendant receives a bribe equivalent to the employment profit in relation to the job act.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted this part of the facts charged is erroneous in misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.

2. Determination

A. The lower court found Defendant A guilty of this part of the facts charged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence as indicated in the judgment, and found Defendant A guilty of this part of the facts charged. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, namely, ① the act of giving or receiving money in return for an improper solicitation, all of which are subject to punishment. As there are motives to prepare a loan certificate in order to conceal that the illegal solicitation is the price, the existence of the loan certificate alone is difficult to recognize AK as an individual loan, ② if the said money is merely a personal loan loan as alleged by the Defendant, there is no reason to receive it through the account of BM, and there is no reason to return it again to AK after the commencement of the audit of the Defendant, and ③ Defendant and AK are merely a personal loan borrowed by the prosecution.