beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals filed by A and the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. As to Defendant A1’s violation of the Act on Regulation and Punishment, etc. of Acceptance of Bribe and Concealment of Criminal Proceeds, Defendant A (hereinafter “P”) did not take charge of ordering construction because the department related to the construction itself does not exist, and the affiliated agency of P merely orders construction by means of open competitive bidding and does not have any influence on the public officials belonging to P. Thus, Defendant A cannot be deemed to have received KRW 10 million from U in relation to his/her duties.
Defendant
A is going to assist U in the removal of removal works.
There is no fact, and 10 million won received from U on November 15, 201 is not merely a bribe borrowed.
Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B) Criminal facts No. 1-C. as stated in the judgment below.
As to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Defendant A did not receive a total of eight million won from V, but was guilty of this part of the facts charged, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, or by misapprehending the legal principles
C) As to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) as stated in the judgment of the court below, there was no fact that Defendant A conspired with B to conclude a service contract with V, and there was no fact that B received a total of KRW 34 million from V for expenses.
Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant A (two years of imprisonment and fine of ten million won) is too unreasonable.
B. Prosecutor 1) Defendant A