beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles on the following grounds, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by either misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles (the defense counsel of the Defendant stated in the grounds of appeal that the part of the bribery amount of KRW 10 million and the part of the bribery amount of KRW 4 million from R are erroneous or misunderstanding of legal principles on the part of the bribery amount of KRW 10 million from theO, but
A) Since the registration of the maintenance company of H’s portion of money and valuables received from M is the duties of the quality guarantee team under H, it is irrelevant to the duties of the Head of I’s 1 Construction Station at the time the Defendant was in charge of at the time.
In addition, the defendant did not receive an illegal solicitation from L to the effect that he would make convenience registered as the secondary pipeline maintenance company of the I Electric Power Complex as the secondary pipeline maintenance company of L.
B) The portion of money and valuables received from theO (in breach of trust) and N (hereinafter “N”)
) Although there was a fact that he received KRW 10 million from the O, the representative director, around January 29, 2010, there was no request from the formerO for the purchase of spare parts. Also, CE (CE) means CE (CE) of the U.S. nuclear power plant manufacturing company.
(C) The Defendant’s additional purchase of spare parts is irrelevant to the Defendant’s duties, and there is no part in the Defendant’s participation. Furthermore, in the year 2009, I’s first construction shop did not have additionally purchased “reserve parts for trial operation and driving.” Since the Defendant was not specified in the facts charged, this part of the indictment procedure is unlawful, since the Defendant’s receipt of money and valuables from P (i) the portion of the receipt of 2 million won in breach of trust from P (ii) the portion of the receipt of money and valuables from P (iii) the Defendant received 2 million won in breach of trust from P as travel expenses, and does not receive money from the Defendant received illegal solicitation in relation to the provision of personnel management convenience.
Sheshes 8 million won in total.