logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.09.26 2014노844
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(뇌물)등
Text

[Defendant A] The part of the lower judgment against the Defendant is reversed.

Defendant 5 years of imprisonment and fine of 60 million won.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although Defendant A(1) imposed a fine on the Defendant in violation of a law, the period of custody should be determined and sentenced simultaneously when the fine is not paid. However, the court below erred by misapprehending the provisions of Article 70 of the Criminal Act, which did not determine the above period of custody when sentenced the Defendant to a fine of KRW 60,000,000.

(2) The Defendant of mistake of facts in the judgment below did not receive money and valuables other than the money and valuables listed in Nos. 5, 6-2, 9, and 11 in the list of crimes in the judgment of the court below, and even though D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) did not know that it was a lump sum subcontracted to J Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “J”) by the Construction Industry Corporation, as well as did not know that it was not aware that it was infinitely abandoned duties because he did not know of the provisions of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry, etc., the Defendant accepted B’s statement, etc. without credibility and convicted him of the fact that the bribery of each money and valuables listed in Nos. 1, 2, 4-2, 5, and 14 in the list of crimes in the judgment of the court below and that

(3) The lower court’s sentence of KRW 4 years of imprisonment, fine of KRW 60 million, and penalty of KRW 53,973,500, which was imposed on the Defendant, is too unreasonable.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below erred by misapprehending the fact that Defendant A received KRW 1 million each from Defendant B around October 17, 2012 and around October 22, 201, as stated in the list of crimes Nos. 3,4-1 in the judgment of the court below and found Defendant B not guilty of the fact that Defendant B offered the above money, and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The former Criminal Act regarding Defendant A’s assertion of violation of law.

arrow