[Defendant A] Imprisonment with prison labor and fine of 40,000,000 won

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Punishment of the crime

[Fact-finding] After Defendant A was appointed as a police officer on December 30, 191, Defendant A served at the one-way police station, and served as the head of the Seoul Police Station L Team during the period from February 12, 2014 to May 6, 2015. From May 7, 2015, Defendant A is a police officer belonging to the Seoul Western Police Station Mate, who is the police officer belonging to the Seoul Western Police Station from May 7, 2015, Defendant B was sentenced to one year and four months of imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) in the support for the development of the Suwon Police Station in Suwon Police Station on November 19, 201, and on December 26, 2012, the parole period passed since the execution of the sentence on October 28, 2013, and the parole period passed on January 19, 2014.

Defendant

C On June 26, 2015, the Seoul Southern District Court sentenced 4 months of imprisonment and one year of suspended execution as a violation of the Automobile Management Act by the Seoul Southern District Court, and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 8, 2015.

Defendant

D On July 15, 2015, the Seoul Southern District Court was sentenced to 6 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended execution as a violation of the Automobile Management Act, and the judgment was finalized on July 23, 2015.

【Criminal Facts】

1. Defendant A

A. On February 2015, the Defendant received bribe (1) from C, while investigating the case of acceptance of bribe, acquisition of stolen goods related to distribution and violation of the Automobile Management Act, etc., the Defendant became aware of criminal offenses, such as violation of the said Automobile Management Act, and filed an application for detention warrant with the Seoul Southern Branch Prosecutor after urgent arrest by acquiring stolen goods. However, a detention warrant was dismissed by the prosecution to the effect that the Defendant would incur a new illness after an complementary investigation.

After a detention warrant was dismissed as above, the Defendant stated to the effect that he/she would make an additional investigation into the above C and re-application for detention warrant and detain it.

After that, through B, the Defendant was asked to provide the Defendant with convenience of investigation with the prior wife and the investigation, and request the Defendant to not make a re-application for detention warrant.

After receiving the above request, the defendant will no longer investigate the above C.