All appeals are dismissed.

The judgment below

Of the judgment of the court below, “Defendant A (including the part not guilty of the grounds) and C.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant A and E

A. The court below held that Defendant A and E violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) (hereinafter "Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes") (hereinafter "the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes"), based on the reasons stated in its reasoning, shall deduct Defendant A and E from the funds of N for the purpose that Defendant A and E do not have any relation with N, or for personal use.

In addition, the intent of unlawful acquisition by the above Defendants was expressed externally by raising a separate fund.

In light of the above, the above defendants guilty of violating the Act of the Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement).

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment of embezzlement and the intention of unlawful acquisition.

B. The court below held that Defendant A’s offering of bribe to DF is KRW 200,000,000,000, based on the reasons stated in its reasoning, that Defendant A’s offering of bribe to DF by the partnership head of the redevelopment and consolidation partnership’s association in the DE area.

In view of the fact that Defendant A was guilty of KRW 200 million out of the fact of giving a bribe to Defendant A’s DF.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of the principle of trial-oriented and the principle of direct deliberation and rules of logic and experience, or by infringing Defendant A’s defense

(c)

The judgment below

According to the omitted records of the judgment of Defendant A, the following facts are revealed.

(1) Of the facts charged against Defendant A, the first instance court acquitted Defendant A of the charge of violating the Act of the Specific Economic Crimes (affort) and of giving AK a bribe, and rendered CJ on May 1, 201.