(영문) 대구고등법원 2016.06.16 2016노69 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구고등법원 2016.06.16 2016노69

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(뇌물)등

Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as to the acceptance of bribe from F, and Defendant 1, as to the acceptance of bribe from F, was received as a result of a trade contract entered into with F, and it is not a bribe because there is no job relation or consideration. ② With respect to the acceptance of bribe from D, it is merely a payment to AI for automobile leasing costs and money due to the Defendant’s friendship, and it does not constitute a bribe due to the lack of job relation or consideration. ③ As to the acceptance of bribe from BF, the Defendant received a reward for attracting funds, and thus, it is not a bribe because the Defendant received a reward for attracting funds. ④ As long as the Defendant’s acceptance of bribe is not recognized, the money provided to the Defendant or AI does not constitute criminal proceeds, and thus, it does not constitute a case where it is disguised or concealed criminal proceeds.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (nine years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. As to the part of KRW 90,000 and KRW 45,000 received from D, prosecutor 1) or misunderstanding of the legal principles, it can be sufficiently recognized that D is a bribe with special interest on the part of the Defendant, which is related to duties and quid pro quo.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the lower court also asserted to the same effect as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the grounds that the Defendant could have received a bribe from F in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court.

① The Defendant and F met by the introduction of Q in early 2008, and thereafter, the Defendant introduced F and R, thereby entering into a scrap metal investment contract between F and R.

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 2017.06.02 2016노1784

-서울고등법원 2018.06.20 2018노525

-서울고등법원 2018.05.30 2017노3803

-대전고등법원 2018.03.30 2017노412

-서울고등법원 2016.02.19 2015노1275