1. The defendant is not guilty. 2. The defendant shall notify the defendant of the summary of the judgment.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant operates a restaurant with the trade name “D” from April 2003, and E works as the head of the department in charge of medicine in the C Public Health Center from March 25, 2005, and is a public health official in charge of the registration, reporting, guidance, inspection, etc. of medical and pharmaceutical medicine from March 25, 2005, who works as the leader in charge of food from the sanitation department and works as the head of the food-related department, and who is in charge of food manufacturing and selling company, reporting of food service establishments,

On May 7, 2009, the Defendant made a solicitation to the effect that he would provide E with prior information and various convenience at the time of guidance and inspection on guidance, inspection, etc. of C Public Health Clinics, and in return, delivered KRW 2 million to the above E’s account to give a bribe in relation to the public official’s duties.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the public prosecutor on the board, the defendant was running a restaurant of 2 million won of the above money to E, and E was working at a C public health clinic with the authority to regulate restaurant’s sanitary condition, etc., and the defendant stated at an investigative agency that he ordered the above money from E’s wife F and stated that E was ordered to order the said money, and changed his statement accordingly.

However, other circumstances recognized through the above evidence, i.e., ① the Defendant was aware of her husband and wife and 20 years or longer, and the Defendant was her friendship with her husband and wife. ② When the Defendant made a statement of the said money in the police investigation process, her stated that she had no memory while undergoing cerebrovascular treatment and conducting a heart surgery twice and transferred it to E, ③ E and the Defendant stated that she donated her high-priced forest to the Defendant as a director gift, by asserting that the said money is a gift, and as a result, she has been donated to her in return. ④ The Defendant is suffering from the actual Defendant’s restaurant, and ④ the Defendant.