beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A Imprisonment of 5 years and 6 months and fine of 250 million won, and Defendant B shall be punished by imprisonment of 4 years.
Reasons
1. Scope of the judgment of this court;
A. The lower court rendered a judgment that, among the facts charged by Defendant A’s violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery) and the offering of bribe by Defendant B, Defendant A received a bribe by receiving entertainment equivalent to KRW 20,284,00 from B, a total of KRW 20,00 from around April 7, 201 through November 19, 201, and golf entertainments, etc. from Defendant A once, and Defendant B offered a bribe as above, the part found guilty in Articles 2 and 3-A of the facts charged in the judgment of the lower court [2] from around April 7, 2011 to November 19, 2011, the part of the remainder of the entertainment, such as the offering of alcohol and entertainment equivalent to KRW 13,830,500, as indicated in the attached List of Crimes (2) as indicated in the judgment of the lower court] was not proven for each crime.
B. However, the prosecutor did not appeal the part not guilty of the above reasons.
Ultimately, the part of the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendants of the above reasons against the Defendants was judged in the court of first instance along with the remaining convictions in the relation of a single comprehensive crime, but was exempted from the object of public defense among the parties. Therefore, the conclusion of the judgment of the court below is followed and the decision
2. The contents contained in the written argument, summary of oral argument, etc. received after the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal regarding the Defendants’ assertion of mistake has expired are determined only to the extent of supplement in the previous grounds for appeal.
As to the Defendants’ assertion on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery) and the offering of a bribe, the lower court, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, determined that: (a) the aggregate of KRW 216,530,000, which Defendant A received from Defendant A on 19 occasions from Defendant B, is difficult to view as a bribe and as a loan.
The court below duly adopted and examined the case.