beta
Text
The judgment below
The guilty part (including the innocent part) shall be reversed.
One year of imprisonment with labor for the accused.
Reasons
Judgment on misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles by prosecutor
A. The part concerning the receipt of money and valuables under the pretext of the B-related solicitation 1) is reliable, and this part of the facts charged is supported by the monetary records between the Defendant and the wife AF, and the details of transfer by AE to the Defendant of KRW 10 million. Nevertheless, there is an error of misunderstanding the facts or misapprehending the legal principles. 2) The lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged on the ground of the facts and circumstances acknowledged by the adopted evidence. The statement in the monetary records records between the Defendant and the spouse is difficult to believe that the Defendant received KRW 26 million under the pretext of solicitation of a public official in the same manner as this part of the facts charged, and it is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant received KRW 26 million under the pretext of solicitation of a public official in the same manner as this part of the facts charged, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this.
Examining these judgments by the lower court with a thorough comparison, the lower court clearly erred in the lower court’s determination as evidence.
There is no reasonable circumstance to deem that the argument leading to the fact-finding is remarkably unfair due to the violation of logical and empirical rules, etc.
On April 5, 2017, the prosecutor submitted financial data that the AE remitted 10 million won to the Defendant’s account as evidence to this court.
However, such circumstance alone is insufficient to reverse the judgment of the court below that it cannot be concluded that it is not a transaction on the debt repayment, the process of the partnership, and the settlement thereof to the Defendant, but a transaction on the basis of the solicitation of public officials as shown in this part of the charges.
In addition, there is an objective reason that may affect the formation of evidence in the process of the court's trial.