The judgment below

Of them, the part against the Defendants (including the part not guilty in the reason) shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendants' punishment (the defendant A: imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months and fine for a fine of 30 million won, defendant C: imprisonment with prison labor for a period of three years and fines of 40 million won) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) In full view of the fact-finding assertion (not guilty part in the grounds) and the statement of the monthly execution notification, which is the basic material for the calculation of the amount of money to be granted, the Defendants are fully recognized as having received a bribe as stated in the facts charged. Nevertheless, the lower court acquitted the Defendants of the charges regarding the part exceeding the part acknowledged by the Defendants on the grounds that there was no proof of crime. Accordingly, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the charges of bribery, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The lower court’s judgment on the grounds of unfair sentencing is so unreasonable that

2. Determination

A. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts 1) Summary of the facts charged A) Defendant A from the end of January 2011

2. At the office of the Q Team branch office of Mju-nam District Headquarters (hereinafter “M”) among the first patrolmen, 2.50,000 won in cash was delivered from T under the pretext of giving rise to the construction convenience.

In addition, from around that time to February 2012, the Defendant received a total of 9750,000 won from T in total over 13 times, as shown in the attached list of crimes (5) of the lower judgment.

Accordingly, the defendant, who is the head of Qba branch, received a bribe from T.

B. Defendant C from the end of January 2011

2. At the first patrolman, 2.50,00 won was delivered in cash from the above T on the pretext of giving rise to the convenience of construction among the above MNa branch offices in the building.

In addition, from around that time to April 2012, the Defendant received a total of KRW 13 million from T under the same name, as shown in the attached list of crimes (6) of the lower judgment, as shown in the attached list of crimes (6).

In this respect, MBD's branch.