The judgment below

Among them, the part on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery) against Defendant B is relevant.

Summary of Reasons for Appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles)

A. Defendant A received from Defendant B the delivery of KRW 5 million in cash and KRW 10 million in cash, Korea-China and KRW 10 million in cash, as to the Defendants’ acceptance of bribe and the grant of bribe, and Defendant B shared this.

B. The duty of selecting a private agency service provider for cleaning affairs at the time of the misunderstanding of the facts related to Defendant A’s duty and the misapprehension of the legal principles belongs to the duties of Defendant A, the chief director of H facilities management corporation.

(c)

Defendant

The operator of AS of a company with limited liability, misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the legal principles concerning the violation of the defense justice in B, is the R, AX, and CZ, and the defendant is an employee, so the limited company AS is receiving cleaning services at H, not the duties of the defendant but the duties of others.

(d)

Defendant

B Of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery), misunderstanding of the fact about job relevance, consideration, etc. or misunderstanding of the legal principles is obligated to perform indirect and auxiliary duties, such as layoff, employment stability, etc. of the environmental US members belonging to the Corporation at the time from the position of the team leader of the AL team. As such, AY’s business to secure a written consent for membership belongs to the scope of its duties.

AY received KRW 50 million from AY in collusion with the defendant, in return for receiving the written consent to the severance from employment of the environmental U.S. source belonging to the Corporation under the management of AY, so the performance in relation to duties is recognized.

With respect to the Defendants’ assertion of mistake as to the grounds for appeal regarding the receipt of bribe and the grant of bribe, the lower court determined that there was insufficient evidence to acknowledge the receipt of money and valuables in light of the circumstances in light of the reasoning of the judgment below, as to whether Defendant A received KRW 5 million from Defendant B, cash KRW 5 million, and cash KRW 10 million, from Defendant B, the lower court determined that there was insufficient evidence to acknowledge the receipt of money and valuables in light of the circumstances of the judgment.

The court below is legitimate.