A public official under Articles 129 through 132 of the Criminal Act cited in Article 133 of the Criminal Act refers to a public official under the premise of the relevant legal provision, which is the executive officer of a government-managed enterprise under Articles 129 through 132 of the Criminal Act, cited in Article 4(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, while in the horse. Therefore, if a public official offers a bribe to an executive officer of a government-managed enterprise, it should be deemed that the crime of offering a bribe is established, such as where a

The term “public official” as referred to in Articles 129 through 132 of the Criminal Act cited in Article 133 of the Criminal Act refers to a person who is the executive officer of a government-managed enterprise under Articles 129 through 132 of the Criminal Act, as cited in paragraph (1) of this Article, under the premise of the relevant legal provision. Thus, if a bribe was given to the executive officer of a government-managed enterprise, it should be deemed that the crime of offering a bribe was established, such as where a bribe was given to a public

Article 4(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 2(3) of the Enforcement Decree of the Aggravated Punishment, etc. Act,

Defendant

Prosecutor

Chuncheon District Court Decision 70No253 delivered on August 26, 1971

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Chuncheon District Court Panel Division.

(1) First, the Prosecutor’s appeal on the grounds of appeal

According to Article 4 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, in the application of Articles 129 through 132 of the Criminal Act, the executive officers of government-managed enterprises shall be regarded as public officials.

The purpose of this, in order to maintain sound social order, only the executives and employees of the government-managed enterprises shall be deemed as public officials and shall be punished as the same as the public officials. As such, the public officials referred to in Articles 129 through 132 of the above Criminal Act include the executives and employees of the government-managed enterprises among the horses. Accordingly, Articles 129 through 132 of the Criminal Act cited in Article 133 of the Criminal Act, which provides for the crime of delivery of a bribe, are also premised on the legal provisions where the executive officers of the government-managed enterprises have been employed. Thus, if a bribe was given to the employees of the government-managed enterprises, it shall be deemed that the crime of offering a bribe was established, such as the case where a bribe was given to the public official.

Therefore, the court below's determination that the defendant's act of issuing a letter of 50,000 won as an agent in charge of the party branch of the Industrial Bank of Korea's ○○○ branch was not constituted a crime of offering a bribe, and therefore, it is erroneous in the misapprehension of the law, since it is reasonable to discuss the above facts.

(2) The grounds of appeal by the following defendant are examined.

The issue is that the lower court did not deny the embezzlement of the instant money and point out misunderstanding of facts, which is recognized by the lower court, and does not serve as a legitimate ground for appeal. However, the crime of embezzlement and the crime of offering of bribe in front of the instant case should be applied at the same time with the concurrent crime. As long as the part of the crime of offering of bribe was reversed, the part of the crime of offering of bribe should be reversed

It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Supreme Court Judge Kim Young-chul (Presiding Judge) (Presiding Justice) and Kim Young-chul Ho-ho