All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal No. 1) No. 1: 33,00,000 won, which was recognized by the court below as acceptance of bribery at the court below, is somewhat divided, but the basic nature of the appeal is the establishment and activities of the committee of promoters and the J Housing Redevelopment Development and Improvement Project Association (hereinafter referred to as the "Association of this case") after being used for the establishment and activities of the committee of promoters and the J Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Association (hereinafter referred to as the "Association of this case"), and returned together with the remainder of the loan, and thus, it cannot be viewed as a bribe.

2) Point 2: 100 million won, which the Defendant, by misapprehending the legal principles on occupational embezzlement, transferred to the K account on July 22, 2016, to the instant association’s account, was repaid with the funds of the association after succeeded to the obligation of the promotion committee. Since the instant association agreed to receive the above funds from the Si Corporation before repaying the funds of the association KRW 100 million to K, it cannot be deemed as embezzlement.

3) Point 3: The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant A (a 3 years of imprisonment and a fine of 66 million won) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

B The defense counsel's written opinion on May 14, 2018 submitted with the lapse of the period for submitting the reasons for appeal, shall be deemed only to the extent that it supplements the reasons for appeal.

: The punishment sentenced by the court below to Defendant B (6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

1) Prosecutor 1: The portion of KRW 280,292,00 among the 282,292,00 delivered to the Defendants by misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the legal principles as to the portion of KRW 247,292,00 was received in return for selecting K as a repair business entity; however, the judgment of the court below which judged Defendant B as having paid money to the Promotion Committee or lent it as a person without interest and acquitted Defendant B of the fact by misunderstanding the facts, or by misunderstanding the relevant legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) Point 2: Each sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants, too unhued, is unfair.

Judgment

Defendant

A.