The Defendants’ appeal is dismissed.

1. The fact that Defendant A’s judgment on the unfair argument of sentencing is currently old, and this court is against the confession of crime, and the offense of violation of the Public Official Election Act as stated in the judgment below, which became final and conclusive, should be considered at the same time with the case of single concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

However, in full view of all the circumstances in the record, including the fact that the defendant, who is a public official in the office of local government, received a bribe in return for the acceptance of the government-grade corporation, and the nature of the crime and the fact that the defendant actively demanded the acceptance of bribe, and the amount of the bribe is not certain, and the defendant's character, character, environment, and circumstances after the crime, the punishment imposed by the court below is too unreasonable to the extent of destruction.

The defendant's assertion that the sentencing of the court below is unfair is not accepted.

2. As to Defendant B’s wrongful determination of the sentencing argument, the following circumstances are favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant was aware of his mistake and was able to commit a crime of giving a bribe; and (b) the victim did not want the punishment of the Defendant but did not have any record of criminal punishment.

However, in full view of all the circumstances indicated in the records, such as the fact that the defendant offered a bribe twice or more in connection with his duties to the public officials and received money in connection with the intermediation of matters belonging to the public official's duties, and that the amount received in return for the referral of the defendant is a large amount of money and the character and conduct of the defendant, environment, and circumstances after the crime, it cannot be said that the punishment imposed by the court below is too unreasonable to be reversed because it is too large.

The defendant's assertion that the sentencing of the court below is unfair is not accepted.

3. As to Defendant C’s assertion of unfair sentencing.