All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the Defendant A’s grounds of appeal, the lower court determined that Defendant A was guilty within the limit of KRW 663,327,370 as to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes among the facts charged in the instant case against the said Defendant, and rejected all the grounds of appeal asserting mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the evaluation of probative value of a conspiracy joint principal offender and a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, or failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, contrary to what is alleged in

In addition, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a minor sentence has been imposed on the above defendant, the argument that the sentencing of the sentence is unreasonable

2. As to Defendant C’s ground of appeal

A. For reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court determined that the Defendant was guilty of bribery within the scope of KRW 15,00,000 on or around July 2009, among the facts charged in the instant case, and rejected the grounds of appeal asserting mistake of facts, etc. by disputing this.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the crime of acceptance of bribe and failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of

(b).