The defendant is an employee of D Co., Ltd. who carries on the business of installing a operating bulletin located in Ilyang-dong, Busan-si B C, and E is the above D representative.

E, in order to facilitate the installation of a operating manual in a F region where the demand for installation of a operating manual is high, the Defendant and Bracker G (Death August 31, 2015), who are employees, had the mind to provide money to the public officials of the Fdoz.

On June 5, 2012, the Defendant received 100 million won in cash at the above D office upon the request of the above E to deliver a bribe to the above public official.

As a result, the Defendant received KRW 100 million, knowing that E would be a bribe for the above public official.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness H;

1. Entry of each part of the protocol concerning the examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Entry of each part of the protocol of suspect interrogation in relation to E by the prosecution;

1. The prosecutor's statement concerning H;

1. Each pocket book;

1. A daily business report;

1. Data of business-related affairs:

1. Status of the progress of projects;

1. Account details, certified copy of the register, and account transactions;

1. Details of use of the corporation card, each daily financial report, funds flow chart, and details of withdrawal;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes in list of project owners’ atmosphere;

1. Article 133 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 129 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime;

1. Determination as to the defendant and defense counsel's assertion of alternative imprisonment with labor

1. The alleged defendant did not receive a request from the Fdog official to deliver a bribe at the time when he received the request from E, and only delivered a bribe to G with no knowledge of the amount of the household bill and only delivered it to G. Since he did not know that he had received the money from G, he did not know that he would deliver it to the public official belonging to the Fdog official through G, there was no intention to acquire third-party brain.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted and examined by this Court, particularly the nature and activities of the Defendant, and D.