A. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery)

(Recognized Crime : Acceptance of Bribery)

B. Acceptance of bribe

(c) Offering of bribe;

1.A: (b)

○○○ (57* 17*********) and public officials

Daejeon, Seosung-dong 978 Masan Village 2 complex apartment 203- 1404

Daejeon District Court Decision 54 Mac-dong 54

2. (b);

Jeon○○○ (60***********), public officials

105- 1105, 105, 1105, 100, 100

Seoul Central District Court Decision 214-15

3.(c)

○○○ (600***********), scenario (ju representative director)

residential Chungcheong-gun written statement 622 member Poolaebol apartment

107 - 805

Busan East-dong, Busan-dong, 449-2

4. D; and

○○ Kim (49 - 49 - ), YNC representative director

Giung-dong 259 new excellent apartment 404 Dong 1403, 1403

Reference domicile Busan Shipping Daegu return 51

Defendants

Scargs

Attorney Kim Jae-hwan, Kim Jin-hun (Defendant No. 1) who is a legal entity

Attorney Choi Jin-han, Civil Right (Defendant 2)

Attorney Im Chang-seat-law (Attorney Kim Chang-soo, Counsel for defendant-3)

Attorney Cho Jong-soo and Park Jong-dae (Defendant 4)

Daejeon District Court Decision 2008Gohap122,144 (Consolidated) Decided August 14, 2008

December 3, 2008

All judgment of the first instance court shall be reversed.

Defendant ○○○ was punished by imprisonment for one year; Defendant ○○ was punished by imprisonment for ten months; Defendant ○○, and Defendant ○○○○.

Each imprisonment with prison labor for not less than eight months shall be punished.

The number of detention days prior to the pronouncement of the first instance judgment shall be 134 days each by the defendant's room ○○, the preceding ○○, and 2

on the day of this day shall be included in the above sentence against the defendant Lee ○.

However, for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, the execution of each of the above punishment against the defendant Lee ○ and Kim ○○

shall be deferred.

The additional collection of KRW 20,40,000 from Defendant ○○○, and KRW 15,00,000 from Defendant ○○○, respectively.

(c)

The acceptance of bribe to Defendant ○○, on March 2006, to Defendant 1, 2006, and the acceptance of bribe to Defendant 1 on March 2006.

On April 2006, 2006, the acceptance of bribe against the Defendant ○○, Defendant 200, and Defendant 200 and Kim○○○.

On March 2006, the offering of a bribe to Defendant Doman-○ on March 2, 2006 and the Defendant on March 3, 2006

The offering of a bribe to ○○○ is not guilty.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant’s room ○○

○ misunderstanding of facts

(1) The part of the first instance court's judgment that received SK gift certificates from Defendant ○○○ on March 2006 [the part of the first instance court's judgment No. 1. 1. A. 2]

Around March 2006, there was no fact that Defendant ○○ demanded or received a SK gift certificate from Defendant ○○, and there was only a fact that 50,000 foot SK gift certificate was received from Defendant ○○○ at the end of 2005 and divided it to employees.

② The part that received KRW 20 million from Defendant Lee ○-○ on March 2006 [the part that was held by the court of first instance No. 1. A. 4]

There is no fact that Defendant ○○ received KRW 20 million, as stated in the facts charged.

③ On April 2006, the part that received KRW 30 million from the snives, snives, snives, and snives from the snives (the part of the first instance judgment No. 1. B.)

There is no fact that 30 million won was received from ○○, as stated in the facts charged. However, on April 2006, 2006, there was only a fact that 5 million won was received from the Defendant’s room, which was parked in the vicinity of the Daejeon Sung-dong Seo-dong Seo-dong, Seodong-dong, Daejeon.

○ Sentencing Points

B. Defendant Jeon-○○

○ misunderstanding of facts

① On April 2006, the part of the first instance judgment that received KRW 10 million from Defendant Lee ○○○ (the part of the second instance judgment No. 2. A)

At the time of Defendant ○○, the amount received from Defendant ○ is not KRW 10 million, but KRW 5 million.

(2) The part which received KRW 10 million from a police officer of the first instance judgment [the part concerning Article 2. b. (2) of the Judgment of the first instance court] from a police officer of the second instance on April 2006

There is no fact that 10 million won was received from new ○○ as stated in the facts charged.

○ Sentencing Points

C. Defendant Lee ○-○, Kim○-○

Each sentencing department;

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts by Defendant ○○○ or ○○○○

A. In the case of the crime of bribery, in order to acknowledge a conviction only with a statement made by the person who has accepted the bribe when the defendant denies the fact of the bribery, and there is no evidence such as financial data to support the bribe, the statement made by the person who has accepted the bribe must be admissible as evidence, and there is credibility to exclude a reasonable doubt. In determining the credibility of the statement, not only the rationality, objective reasonableness, and consistency in the contents of the statement itself, but also its human beings, and there is an interest in which the statement is obtained as a human being, in particular, if there is a suspicion of a crime against him, and there is a possibility that the investigation is being initiated, or if the investigation is being conducted, it is possible to use it, and even if the testimony does not reach the extent that the admissibility of the statement is denied, it is also necessary to examine whether there is a possibility that the statement may affect the statement made by the person who has been faced with it (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Do5701, Jun. 11, 2002).

On the premise of such a legal doctrine, it is to determine whether the Defendant’s defense of mistake by the former ○○ or the former ○○○○○, but the evidence relationship is common depending on the donor of the bribe, and thus, it is to determine the assertion by the Defendant’s room, the former ○○, and the former ○○.

B. The part concerning acceptance of bribe from Defendant 000

(1) Summary of the facts charged

(A) Defendant ○○ is serving as the director of the City of Yeongi-Gun Office.

1) On March 1, 2006, the Defendant, a director of the Yeongi-gun Office of Yeongi-gun and office of the Yeongi-gun Office of Yeongi-gun (hereinafter referred to as the “ Sui-gun”) proposed that he will receive a bribe in relation to his duties by receiving the request that he will properly dispose of the tenant recruitment design for the e-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Saman apartment (hereinafter referred to as “e-Saea-Saea-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa

2) On March 2006, 2006, at the Defendant’s residence in the Haman-Eup, the Defendant received a bribe in relation to his duties, as a reward, after receiving a solicitation that the sales price applied from ○○○○ to the Yeongi-Gun Office for the recruitment of occupants on a usual basis would be 6,300,000 won of the public notice of the recruitment of occupants on a detailed basis, in cash 20,000 won as a reward.

(B) On April 206, 2006, Defendant Jeon-○, while working as a city of Yeong-gun and a housing-related director, received a bribe in relation to his duties after being issued a cash of KRW 10 million as a honorarium, from Defendant Lee ○○○’s request for prompt approval of the proposal for the announcement of apartment recruitment at the apartment site office in the e-Sa-Sa-Sae-Sae-Sae-Sae-Sae-Sae-Sae-Sae-Sae-Sae-Sae-Sae-Sae-Sa

(2) Determination.

(A) As evidence concerning this part of the facts charged, there are several scenarios accounting documents, such as Defendant ○○○○, Defendant Kim○○, a representative director of Suwon○○○○, and Defendant 1’s statements and lectures, ○○○○○○, and ○○○○○○○○○’s preparation, which are employees of Suwon’s scenarios (No. 133 of the Investigation Record), and “the details of data processing without investigation records” (no. 87 pages of the Investigation Record). However, the remaining evidence, except the Defendant’s statements, except the remainder of the evidence, accepted money and valuables from Defendant ○○○○○○○ and ○○○○○, who received money and valuables from Defendant 2○○○○ and ○○○○○○○○, who were ○○○○, and who offered money and valuables from Defendant 1 to Defendant 2○○○○○, or who received money and valuables from Defendant 200, on the basis of the fact that Defendant 1 directly received money and valuables from Defendant 500.

(B) In light of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court and the statement of the Defendant ○○○ in the party trial, the part that the former ○○○○ received from the Defendant ○○○○○○ (the part that the former ○○○○ received KRW 5 million from the Defendant ○○○ around April 2006, among the facts charged, the part that the former ○○○ received KRW 5 million from the Defendant ○○○○) is difficult to accept.

1) The Defendant ○○ reversed the statements made several times on whether Defendant ○○ and the previous ○○ have given money and valuables to Defendant ○○, from the commencement of an investigation by the prosecution to the trial of the prosecution, and on the amount, frequency, and time of delivery of money and valuables given.

① 검찰 제1회 피의자신문조서 작성 당시, 처음에는 '2006. 초순경 저녁시간에 피고 인 방○○의 원룸으로 찾아가 1,000만 원을 전달한 이외에는 피고인 방○○ 또는 피고 인 전○○에게 돈을 지급한 사실이 없다 고 주장하다가, 검사가 수피리오의 '3월 자금 흐름’, ‘무자료경비처리내역’ 등을 제시하면서 피고인 김○○이 2006. 3. 30. 피고인 이 ○○에게 피고인 방○○, 전○○에 대한 분양승인 로비명목으로 3,000만 원을 가져갔 다고 진술하였다고 하자, ‘처음에는 피고인 방○○에게 1,000만 원을 전달하였다고 했 는데, 지금 생각해 보니 2,000만 원을 준 것 같고 , 그 3,000만 원 중 2,000만 원을 전 달하고 나머지 1,000만 원은 피고인 전○○에게 전달하려고 하였지만 전달하지 못하였 다 ' 고 진술하였다. ② 검찰 제2회 피의자신문조서 작성 당시에는, “피고인 방○○에게 준 날 다음 날에 피고인 전○○에게도 수피리오의 현장사무실에서 1,000만 원을 지급 하였다” 고 진술하는 한편, “무자료 경비 처리내역’ 에 ‘3. 24. 사장님 가지급금(주택계 박과장 로비)'라고 기재되어 있는 2,000만 원은 피고인 방○○의 원룸으로 찾아가 피 고인 방○○에게 준 것 같고, 그 후 피고인 방○○이 분양승인을 해 주지 않아 다시 피고인 방○○에게 2,000만 원, 피고인 전○○에게 1,000만 원을 주었다” 고 진술함과 아울러, “피고인 방○○이 상품권을 좀 구입해 달라고 하여 두 차례에 걸쳐 상품권을 구입하여 주었는데 첫 번째 구입한 600만 원 상당의 SK상품권은 피고인 방○○에게 모두 전달하였는지, 일부만 주고 일부는 다른 곳에 사용하였는지 모르겠고, 두 번째 구 입한 500만 원 상당의 SK상품권은 피고인 방○○에게 모두 준 것 같은데 확실하지는 않다”고 진술하였다. ③ 검찰 제3회 피의자신문조서 작성 당시에는, “무자료경비처리 내역’ 에 ‘3. 15. 사장님 가지급금(군청 정계장 로비)’라고 기재된 1,000만 원을 피고인 방○○에게 전달한 것 같고, 전회 진술한 2006. 3. 24. 자 2 ,000만 원은 피고인 방○○ 에게 전달한 것이 아니며, 2006. 3. 30. 출금된 3,000만 원 중 2,000만 원은 피고인 방○○에게, 1,000만 원은 피고인 전○○에게 준 것이 맞다” 고 진술하는 한편, “2006. 3 .경 두 차례에 걸쳐 구입한 1,100만 원 상당의 SK상품권 중 7- 800만 원 상당을 피 고인 방○○에게 준 것 같고, 나머지는 어디에 사용하였는지 모르겠다” 고 진술하였다. ④ 제1심에서는, “2006. 3. 초순경 피고인 방○○에게 500만 원 상당의 SK상품권을 주었는데, 직원들이 사다가 봉투에 주는 그대로 전달하였기 때문에 그 내용물을 뜯어 보지는 않아 전달한 SK상품권의 액수가 얼마였는지는 정확히 모른다” 고 진술하는 한 편, “2006. 3. 하순경 피고인 방○○에게 전달한 2,000만 원도 직원들이 신문지에 싸 서 쇼핑백에 담아 놓은 것을 그대로 전달하였기 때문에 액수가 얼마인지 알지 못하고, 2006. 3. 하순경 피고인 전○○에게 전달한 1,000만 원 또한 직원들이 신문지에 싸서 준 것을 그대로 전달하였기 때문에 그 액수가 정확히 얼마인지는 알지 못한다” 고 진술 하였다. ⑤ 당심에서는, “피고인 방○○에게 준 SK상품권이 10,000 원 권인지, 100,000 원 권인지 알지 못하고, 전체 금액도 정확하게 모르며, 일부 상품권을 피고인 김○○과 함께 사용한 것 같다” 고 진술하는 한편, 2006. 3. 하순경 피고인 방○○에게 주었다는 2000만 원 부분에 대하여는 “날짜는 정확하지 않는데 검찰에서 조사받을 때 통장에서 돈이 인출된 날짜를 보고 그렇다고 진술한 것이고, 강○○가 신문지에 싸서 준대로 가 져다주었다” 고 진술하였다.

2) The statements made at the prosecutor’s office of Defendant Lee ○○ appears to have been reversed each time when considering the documents, such as Defendant Kim○○○, Gangwon-do, and Cho Il-○, which the prosecutor presented under the pretext of delivering the documents to Defendant Lee○○○, and the documents, including “the cash flow” and “the details of the data security guards,” and Scenars, which were presented by the prosecutor. The statements made at the prosecutor’s office of this case appear to have been reversed each time. In the first and the court of the trial of the first instance, since the employees only delivered cash and merchandise couponss to the former ○○, and the amount of cash and merchandise couponss that were presented to the former ○○○○, and the statements made clear and clear are presented.

3) According to the direction of Defendant ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, Defendant 2 entered the details of the funds among the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, which was indicated on the 3-month funding flow, and the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○’s details of the management of non-data, stated that the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○ KRW 10 million was KRW 50 million in addition to the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, but it was difficult for Defendant 2 to provide the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, which was written on the 6-month Nonindicted 15, 2006. Moreover, according to each of the above documents, Defendant 2 was written on the Cheong○○.

4) While Defendant ○○ and Defendant ○○ (hereinafter “○○”) were suspected of having used corporate funds as an individual person, and there was a dispute over the facts of embezzlement with Defendant ○○○ and the embezzlement by requesting a certified public accountant to confirm, the investigation of this part of the facts charged was initiated following Defendant ○○’s accusation of offering of bribe. Defendant ○○ used the money received as a personal living expense, etc. Defendant Kim○-ro’s personal living expense, etc. As such, it cannot be ruled out that Defendant ○○ stated that it was more favorable to Defendant ○○○ and Defendant ○○, rather than taking a civil liability liability for damages under the crime of embezzlement and accordingly, Defendant ○ made a false statement by deeming that it was a bribe to Defendant ○○○ and Jeon○○○.

5) Recognizing the fact that ○○○○ received television worth KRW 5.4 million from the time of the initial statement at the prosecution, and that ○○○ received KRW 10 million from the Defendant’s Lee○○ at the end of 2005, and distributed 500,000 won to its employees, the Defendant’s defense room stated that: (a) as stated in this part of the facts charged, the receipt of 5 million SK gift certificates was made on March 2006; and (b) the receipt of 20 million worth from ○○○ on March 1, 2006, and the receipt of 20 million worth from ○○○ on March 2006, the Defendant’s initial investigation team withdrawn the full rejection of the facts charged; (c) but, at the time of the 6th investigation protocol at the prosecution’s early stage, the Defendant’s statement was made as to the part received money; and (d) there was no need to make a true statement from 00,006.

In light of the above facts, rather than the Defendant’s statements, it seems that the Defendant’s ○○ and ○○○’s statements are more reliable than the Defendant’s ○○○’s statements, where it is unclear that the aforementioned statements are inconsistent.

C. The part concerning acceptance of bribe from ○○○

(1) Summary of this part of the facts charged

(A) On April 206, 200 to 21:00, the defendant's defense center located near the residential area of the defendant's defense center, 513-7, the total of the 513-households, which were constructed in the 76-7-day Seoul Special Self-Governing City, the Do governor, after promptly obtaining approval of the above public notice of invitation of the apartment, it was received in cash, 30,000 won as a reward, and received in connection with his duties. The defendant's defense center, on April 2006, received the bribe from the new ○, a director of the Doi-gu Special Metropolitan City Development (hereinafter referred to as the "Doi-si Development") who is a director of the Doi-si Special Metropolitan City, Doi-gun Special Metropolitan City Development (hereinafter referred to as the "Doi-gun Special Metropolitan City Development") from the 513-year Special Metropolitan City development.

(B) Around 21:00 to 23:00 on April 2006, Defendant Jeon-○ received cash worth KRW 10 million in return for the fact that the draft of the recruitment notice to move in an apartment house in the YYY-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Seoul Special Self-Governing Province was approved on the 18th day of the same month, and received a bribe in relation to no position in return for the fact that it was approved on the 18th day of the same month.

(2) Determination

(A) The evidence on this part of the facts charged is evidence, such as the new ○○○, the representative director of the development of a iono city, the details of the passbook transaction, and the details of the bank account settlement. The statements on ionn son's statements are professional statements that the new ○○○ received money from the Defendant’s room, the former ○○○, and the former ○○ after receiving money from the Defendant’s room, and the latter ○, and other evidence are merely circumstantial evidence. The fact that the Defendant’s room, the former ○, and the former ○ received money from the new ○○○, and the latter ○ is recognized (the Defendant’s room ○) that received money from the new ○○, among these facts charged. Meanwhile, the Defendant’s former ○ was completely denied this part of the facts charged, but as seen in the facts charged, it is recognized that the remainder of the Defendant’s new ○○, other than this part of the facts charged, was delivered KRW 10 million from the new ○○ on April 2006.

(B) The evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court and the following circumstances revealed by the statement of the new ○○○○ in the trial are hard to accept the remainder of the assertion of gold provision except for the part acknowledged as having been received by Defendant ○○ and the previous ○○○○○○ from Defendant ○○○○ (the part of the facts charged in this part of the charges that Defendant ○○ received KRW 5 million from Defendant ○○○○ from Defendant ○○ on April 2006).

1) From the beginning of the investigation, ○○○ consistently stated to the effect that “○○○○○○○○○○○,” whose name “one million won was to be delivered to Defendant○○○○○○○○○○○○,” and whose name was to be delivered KRW 20 million as indicated in the facts charged, was to have been delivered each of the above funds to Defendant○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, as indicated in the facts charged. However, as to the source of the funds for KRW 30 million, the New○○○○○, who first received KRW 10 million from her head on April 4, 2006, and then withdrawn the above funds from KRW 15 million from her head on the following day, and the said funds were to have been delivered to the Defendant○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, which was to have been distributed KRW 50 million from 1.5 million from her head on the following day.

However, unlike the statement of ○○○, the Madern stated consistently that the Defendant shall be memoryd with cash at a time under the name of 30 million won for the preceding month to ○○○○○○. In addition, according to the details of the passbook transaction (Investigation Records 599 pages), it is doubtful whether the amount of KRW 30 million was deposited at around 14:30 of April 7, 2006, but it was deposited at around 15:16 of the 40 minutes, and whether the amount of KRW 30 million was deposited at around 15:16 of the 40 minutes, and as stated in the statement of ○○○. Accordingly, in light of the statements of Maddi City Development, it is doubtful whether the amount of KRW 30 million delivered to ○○○ was deposited at KRW 30 million,000,000 as stated in the statement of ○○○.

2) With respect to the amount corresponding to the delivery to ○○○○○ by Defendant, Madern, etc., the case held that even though ○○○○ had already made a statement to Defendant 1 on April 18, 2006, it did not clearly state the amount and frequency of the amount corresponding to 10 million won to be delivered to ○○○○○○○○, by stating that the cause of 5 million won was 10 million won or 10 million won to be delivered to ○○○○○○, the first time after the first time of April 2006, 2006, Defendant 10 million won was given to ○○○, such as the tenant invitation announcement ( April 18, 2006). In addition, even though ○○○ had already made a statement to Defendant ○○○, it did not clearly state the amount and number of times of the amount corresponding to 10 million won to be delivered to ○○○.

3) In addition, since the new ○○ also argued that he received money from dump son to Defendant ○○ or former ○○○ by receiving money from Defendant ○○ or former ○○, etc., even though part of the money received was used as personal living expenses, etc., the possibility that the crime of embezzlement and the civil liability for damages arising therefrom may be held liable for the crime of embezzlement, and that all the amount received from dump dump dump to Defendant ○ or former ○ was given as a bribe cannot

4) Recognizing the fact that ○○○ consistently received money from ○○○ in line with the time when the second interrogation protocol was prepared by the prosecution, Defendant’s defense room stated that the amount is KRW 30 million, not KRW 5 million. As seen earlier, insofar as ○○ does not properly disclose the source of funds that ○○ offered to ○○○○○, it is difficult to readily reject the credibility of Defendant’s statement. In addition, Defendant ○○○ also withdrawn the attitude of denying the entire facts charged at the initial investigation and court of the prosecution, but at the time of the 6th interrogation protocol prepared, it is difficult to dismiss the credibility of Defendant’s statement in light of the fact that ○○○’s statement was given and received KRW 10 million from ○○○○ on April 2006, and that it was difficult to consistently dismiss Defendant’s statement given and received money from ○○○ on April 206.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the Defendants’ assertion of unfair sentencing in accordance with Article 364(2) and (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the judgment of the court of the first instance is reversed and all of the judgment of the court of the first instance is reversed (it does not contain any assertion of misunderstanding of facts. However, since the grounds for appeal on mistake of facts are accepted by the Defendant’s room, ○○ and ○○○○○○○, and the former ○○, which led to a change favorable to the Defendant’s ○○ and ○○○, as such change was made favorable to the Defendant’s ○○

Criminal facts

Defendant ○○ is a public official in charge of the management of multi-family housing, authorization and permission of multi-family housing, recruitment of occupants, designation of a supervisor of multi-family housing construction, and management, etc. while working for the city of Yeong-gun Office from May 6, 2005 to December 31, 2006 as the head of Yeong-gun Office City from October 19, 2004 to January 24, 2007.

1. Defendant’s room ○

A. The part of acceptance of bribe from the defendant Lee ○○ and Kim ○○

(1) On Nov. 1, 2005, the Defendant, the director of Suwon-dong 978 YVTV apartment 203 Do, 1404, was asked to receive a bribe in relation to his duties by sending his reasonable opinion in relation to the housing construction project plan, which is a new apartment construction project, from the Defendant, the head of the Defendant, who was the director of Suwon-do, to Chungcheong-do, from the head of the office of the Defendant, the head of the Dong-gun, the consultation department, to obtain the approval of the project plan by sending his opinion that the project plan is reasonable in relation to the construction project plan for the new apartment, which is a new apartment construction project, from Chungcheong-do.

(2) On March 2006, 2006, the Defendant received a bribe in relation to his duties after receiving a cash of KRW 10 million as a honorarium from the Defendant’s Lee ○○○ to file an application for the announcement of the apartment recruitment plan from the Defendant Lee ○○ to the Yeong-gun Office at the Defendant’s residence located in 113-5, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

B. The part concerning acceptance of bribe from 000 Madle and Madle○

On April 2006, the Defendant: (a) received a solicitation from the new ○○, a director of the Dadi City Development, to promptly approve and request the proposal for the announcement of apartment for the rent of 6,170,000 won for the apartment for the rent of 6,170,000 won; (b) received 5,00,000 won in cash as a reward for the reward in order to accept a bribe from the office. (c) At the same time, the Defendant received 5,00,000 won as a bribe from the office.

2. The preceding ○○○

A. The part of acceptance of bribe from this ○○ and Kim○○

On April 206, 2006, after receiving a request from the defendant ○○○, to promptly approve a proposal for the public announcement of the recruitment of apartment occupants in the above e-Sae-Sae-Sace that was applied from the defendant ○○○ to the Yeongi-Gun Office in the above e-Saol apartment site office located in the Yae-Sae-Sae-Sae-Sae-Saeae-Sae-Saei Si

B. The part concerning acceptance of bribe from 000 Manum and Manum○

On April 206, 2006, around 20:30 to 22:30, from the beginning of the year 2006 to the end of the year 20:30, the name of the company behind the Dong-dong Homes in the Daejeon Pungdong-dong, Daejeon Pungdong-gu, is unknown, the company received a request from ○○ to promptly approve the proposal for the announcement of the apartment for the Guide to the eurgical City development, and received a bribe in relation to his duties by receiving a cash of KRW 10 million as a honorarium

3. Joint criminal conduct by Defendant Lee○-○ and Kim○-○

Defendant ○○ offered money and valuables to Defendant ○○, the director of the city division of the Yeong-Gun Office, and Defendant 1 who is in charge of the affairs, such as authorization and permission, in order to ensure that the apartment business is well carried out under the e-mail, while taking charge of the affairs, such as authorization and permission of apartment business in the e-mail, and offered them to Defendant ○○ and Defendant 1 who is in charge of the city and the housing. Defendant ○○ and Kim○○ agreed to offer a bribe to Defendant ○○ and ○○○ and ○○○, such as accepting the scenario fund by granting it to Defendant ○○○ and accepting it.

A. The offer of a bribe to Defendant ○○

(1) On Nov. 1, 2005, Defendant 2005, at the house of Defendant 203 and 1404, Defendant 200, Defendant 4 offered a bribe in relation to the public official’s duties by delivering an opinion that the project plan is reasonable in the city of the Yeong-gun Office, the consulting department, in relation to the housing construction project for the e-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-gu, which was applied to Defendant 2

(2) On March 2006, Defendant ○○ offered a bribe in connection with public official’s duties by offering a solicitation that Defendant ○○○○, who is scheduled to file an application with the Yeongi-gun Office for the announcement of apartment recruitment in accordance with the foregoing e-tax trend, at the place of residence of ○○○ located in Yeongi-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seonam-gun, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, to properly handle the proposal for the announcement of apartment recruitment in accordance with the e-tax trend.

B. Offering of bribe to Defendant 200

On April 206, 2006, Defendant ○○ offered a bribe in relation to public official’s duties by promptly approving a proposal for the public notice of the recruitment of occupants in accordance with the above e-mail, which was applied to Defendant ○○○, at the on-site office of the apartment site located in the e-Sae-Sae-Saei Si, Yeongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Seoul Special Self-Governing Province.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of the defendant's room, ○○ and ○○;

1. Each legal statement of the defendant Lee ○○ and Kim ○○

1. Each legal statement of the witness of the first instance court, 00, 00, Matern, Matern, Matern, and Matern;

1. Protocol concerning the interrogation of the Defendants by the prosecution

1. Each prosecutor’s protocol on Kim○-○, Shin○-○, Gangwon-○, Cho Jong-○, an objection, and Park ○-○;

1. 임○○ , 이◆◆, 박◎◎, 명○○의 각 진술서

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. Photographs related to ○○○, a photo related to ○○○, Samsung PAV television front photograph, Samsung PAVV

Television model name photographs, bicycle photographs

1. Each investigation report (report attached to the Si of Gun administration and the division of business, and the registration of the corporation developing a Ridi City;

Attachment of a copy, attachment of the certified copy of the corporate register, report on the results of search, ○○

Reporting on television and bicycle photographs in mar, and attaching a copy of the ○○ new bank passbook

Report, confirmation report on the affairs in charge of the former ○○, and EL also among the accounting books of the Edi City Development Corporation.

Report on confirmation of the details of expenditure, attachment of documents on transactions of agricultural accounts for Eddi City Development, and transfer related to Eddi-○

Confirmation of shot iron, deposit passbooks, and the necessity of search and seizure, and confirmation of casino entry of ○○ riverland

Report, consultation on related affairs, such as Edd City Development, Approval of Edio Plan for Housing Construction Project, etc.

첨부보고, 박◎◎, 임○○, 박○○, 이◆◆ 명의통장 사본 첨부보고, 매각부지 현황

Attachment Report, such as Copy, etc.)

1. Public announcement on the invitation of occupants to take measures, bamboo thicker, post, mark, mark, flow of money for March, and each day;

The current status of daily funds ( March 15, 30.3), each substitute table ( March 15, 30.3), and the personnel records card of each public official;

A copy of the head of the Tong (in the case of a State), shopping bags, agricultural bags, and the head of the Tong in the Han Bank (in the case of a State: the nominal owner:

(State) A copy, a statement of savings deposit transactions (from January 1, 2005 to April 10, 2008), a copy of the real estate register, and a copy of the register.

Application of the provisions of the Act and subordinate statutes on the sales contract of movable property, inquiry sheet requesting the details of demand transactions, certificate of deposit transaction record, liquidity transaction record

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

A. Defendant’s room ○, and electric ○○

Article 129(1) of the Criminal Code (Selection of Imprisonment)

B. Defendant Lee ○-○ and Kim○-○

Articles 133(1), 129(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act.

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [In the case of Defendant ○○○, the punishment stipulated in the net crime of acceptance of bribe on March 2006, which is the most severe criminal record, and the punishment stipulated in the crime of acceptance of bribe on April 2006, which is the most severe criminal record on April 1, 2006, with respect to Defendant ○○ and Kim○○, the punishment stipulated in the crime of acceptance of bribe on March 2006, which is the most severe criminal record on March 206, 206, aggravated punishment for each concurrent crime prescribed in the crime of bribery

1. To include days of pre-trial detention (the defendant's room, ○○, ○○, ○○);

Article 57 of the Criminal Code

1. Suspension of execution (the defendant Lee ○, Kim ○○);

Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Code

1. Additional collection (the defendant's ○○, the preceding ○○);

Article 134 of the Criminal Code

Parts of innocence

1. Defendant’s room ○

A. The point of acceptance of bribe to a policeman on March 2006

The summary of this part of the facts charged is that on March 2006, Defendant ○○ received a bribe in relation to his duties, in response to the request from Defendant ○○○ in the city and office of the Si/Gun/Gu office located in Yeongnam-gun, the Si/Eup/Myeon Office of Yeongnam-gun, and received a reward amounting to KRW 5 million in the name of the SK Articles 5 million in the name of the SK Articles. As seen in the judgment of the grounds for appeal, this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of facts constituting an offense, and thus, the Defendant

B. The point of acceptance of bribe on March 2006

The summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: on March 2006, Defendant ○○ received a bribe in connection with his duties by receiving cash of KRW 20 million as a honorarium from Defendant ○○○○○ in the Defendant’s residence located in the Eup/Myeon of the above measure taken by Defendant on his own, and on the ground that this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of criminal facts as seen in the judgment of the grounds for the lawsuit, and thus, Defendant ○○ acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure

C. A violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes

The summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: Defendant ○○ received a bribe by receiving cash of KRW 30 million from ○○○ in his/her duties in return for his/her duties, from the front day of April 2006 to 21:00 to 21:00, from the front day of the second day of the year 2006, and receiving a bribe by receiving cash of KRW 30 million in his/her duties under the pretext of the honorarium, and this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of the facts charged as seen in the judgment of the grounds for appeal, but the same date and time of the crime and five million won in his/her lawsuit, which is the same in relation to the crime, and so long as the fact of acceptance of bribe is found to be guilty, Defendant ○○ does not separately sentence the charge

2. The preceding ○○○

A. On April 2006, the charge of acceptance of bribe from Defendant Lee ○○ and Kim○○, Defendant 2006

The summary of this part of the facts charged is that the Defendant received a bribe in connection with his duties after receiving a request from the Defendant ○○○ in cash as a honorarium from the site office of the apartment site in the e-Sae-Sae-Sae-Sari Eup, Manam-gun, Hanam-gun, on April 2006, in response to the solicitation of the Defendant from the Defendant ○○○, and received a bribe in relation to his duties. This part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of criminal facts as seen in the judgment of the grounds for appeal. However, inasmuch as the Defendant found the Defendant guilty of the bribery charge of KRW 5 million at the same time and at the same place in relation to the crime

B. The point of the acceptance of bribe on April 2006

The summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: even though EL, which is a part of the districts adjacent to the districts of 21:00 to 23:00 on April 2006, 200, was received in cash from ○○○○ in front of an entertainment tavern and received a bribe in connection with his duties under the pretext of a honorarium, in response to a solicitation from ○○○○ in front of an entertainment tavern, and received a bribe. The facts charged in this part of the facts charged constitute a case where there is no proof of criminal facts as seen in the judgment of the grounds for appeal, and thus, is acquitted pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

A. On March 2006, the offering of a bribe to the Defendant’s defense room ○○ on March 2006

The summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: (a) in collusion with the defendant Lee ○○ and Kim ○○ on March 2006, 2006, the defendant Lee ○○ made a solicitation to the defendant's office in the city and office of the Yeong-gun Office in the Yeong-gun Office in the Yeong-gun Office of Yeongnam-gun, the defendant Lee Jong-gun on March 2006, delivered the amount of five million won of SK Articles 5 million won under the name of honorarium and offered a bribe to the public official in relation to the public official's office; (b) this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of criminal facts as seen in the judgment of the grounds for appeal against the defendant

B. The point of offering of a bribe to a police officer on March 1, 2006

The summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: (a) in collusion with the defendant Lee ○○ and Kim ○○ on March 2006, the defendant gave a bribe in connection with public official's duties by requesting the defendant Lee ○○ to make a solicitation at the ○○○○'s place of residence located in the Dongwon-won-Eup on March 2006, and providing cash of KRW 20 million for a private purpose; and (b) this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of facts of crime as seen in the judgment of the grounds for appeal against the defendant ○○, and thus, is acquitted pursuant to the latter part of

C. The point of offering of a bribe to Defendant 1, 2006 on April 4, 2006

The summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: (a) in collusion with the defendant Lee ○○ and Kim ○○ on April 2006, the defendant gave a bribe in connection with the official duties of the public official by providing cash of KRW 10 million in the name of the case in favor of the former ○○ at the apartment site office on the e-mail e-mail e-mail e-mail clicking day on April 2006; and (b) in so far as the facts charged in this part of the facts charged constitute a case where there is no proof of criminal facts as seen in the judgment of the grounds for appeal against the former ○○, the same date and time in relation to the crime, and the fact of offering a bribe of KRW 5 million on the former ○ at the place

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Kim Sang-hoon (Presiding Judge)

A line already made

Theirs kin