2016Gohap920 Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery)

Name of crime: Acceptance of Bribe), Violation of Political Funds Act, and Specific Crimes Aggravated Punishment

Violation of the Punishment, etc. Act (Acceptance of Property by Mediation)

A

The term "cathoe" (prosecution), the South Korean Government, Kim Young-young, Cho Young-do, and Kim Young-gu (Public trial)

Law Firm B, Attorneys C, D, and E

June 23, 2017:

A person shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not less than two years and six months and by a fine not exceeding twenty million won with respect to the crimes of Articles 1 and 3 in the judgment of the defendant, and one year with prison labor for the crimes of Article 2 in the judgment.

When the defendant fails to pay the above fine, the defendant shall be confined in the old house for the period calculated by converting 100,000 won into one day.

373,295,316 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

The above fine is ordered to pay an amount equivalent to the above fine.It is not guilty of the violation of the Political Funds Act among the facts charged in the instant case.

Criminal 1)

【Institution of Sanctions】

1. Status of the defendant;

around 2004, the Defendant joined the election campaign of the candidate for the special election in the G market and started political activities as a member of the National Assembly from May 30, 2008 to May 29, 2012, and subsequently recommended the National Land Committee members of the National Assembly on February 13, 2012, and on February 13, 2017, the name of the political party (except where it is changed to the K Political Party, but it is not necessary to divide it for convenience; hereinafter referred to as the “J Party”) to the presidential election competition competition candidate L competition campaign for the competition candidate. The Defendant was elected as the 18th National Assembly member of the N District on April 10, 2008 and was elected as the 18th National Assembly member of the N District and was elected as a member of the National Assembly from May 30, 2008 to May 29, 2012.

On June 2012, the Defendant subscribed to the Chairman of the Committee on N Party N.N., who was a police officer, and was scheduled to enter into the election campaign of the candidate for the L substitute in Korea in 2012, but was suspected on August 16, 2012, the Defendant failed to comply with the wind expelled from the J Party on the ground of the charge that he received the Gongcheon Constitutional Court money on August 16, 2012. The Defendant was subject to a non-prosecution disposition of suspicion on September 25, 2013 in the case of violation of the Public Official Election Act related to the Gongcheon-do M. M. M. M. M. M., on April 8, 2013, and was reappointed to the J Party on April 8, 2013, and was entrusted with the local election planning team leader in preparation for the 'Korean election' from February 2014 to March 6, 2014, and the Central Policy Committee Chairperson from around May 13, 2014.

From August 2014 to August 2014, the Defendant prepared to establish an organization from around August 2014 under the pretext of establishing a sustainable development plan and action plan in the N area. On November 25, 2014, the Defendant held an inaugural general meeting of the National Assembly on November 20, 2014, and secured a party responsible for the self-party election of the National Assembly member of the 20th National Assembly.

On July 10, 2015, the Defendant was appointed as the Chief Secretary of the Presidential Secretariat, and was in office until June 8, 2016. On the other hand, the Defendant assist the President in overall affairs related to the National Assembly, political rights, and civil society organizations. On the other hand, the Defendant directly assisted the President in relation to the affairs in charge of the Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs (such as the support of affairs, finance, taxation affairs, etc. of the national local government), the affairs of the Chief of the National Police Agency (public security affairs such as the national criminal investigation, etc.) and the affairs related thereto.

2. Status of the persons concerned;

R is the chairperson of a special purpose corporation, corporation V, and U.S. (hereinafter referred to as "U.") that is established for the implementation of T&D business (hereinafter referred to as "U business"), such as S, and is a person who actually controls and operates the above company and W&D corporation (hereinafter referred to as "W"), X,Y, Z, and AAA (hereinafter referred to as "AA"), which are the related companies.

R From November 2006, as the actual business entity, L has been running U business through W, Co., Ltd., V, U., and other related entities. In addition, the project to implement AB apartment in Young City through X, Inc., Inc., and the project to implement AB apartment in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government through Z, Inc., and the project to implement AB apartment and main complex commercial buildings in parallel through Z. From around 2011, F has operated AF business (hereinafter referred to as “AF business in this case”) in succession, which is an agent for the implementation of AD construction, with sales facilities, cultural and assembly facilities, accommodation facilities, business facilities, etc. on the ground of 12,276 square meters in the supervision of AD Corporation.

AI is the president of the AJ Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "AJ"), who is a specialized company for lending public telephone terminals combined with ATR devices, and has actually been operating the said company.

【Criminal Facts】

1. Acceptance of bribe;

On September 7, 2015, the Defendant received a bribe in an amount equivalent to KRW 19,465,500 for the same purpose, from June 3, 2016, as shown in attached Table (1), to the effect that, if necessary, the Defendant would exercise influence over the duties of the local government having jurisdiction over U business, investigation, etc., as a secretary of the Presidential Secretariat, etc., when necessary, as a secretary of the P Secretariat, he/she received a bribe in an amount equivalent to KRW 19,465,500 for the same purpose, from that time, from that time, to June 3, 2016, by taking into account the Defendant’s payment of KRW 650,00,00, such as the Defendant’s drinking value, as described in attached Table (1).

2. Violation of the Political Funds Act;

(a) Acceptance from R;

1) Receipt of merchandise coupons

Between August 31, 2011 and December 2014, the Defendant received from R to the 2014, the amount equivalent to KRW 21.7 million in total, and KRW 21.7 million in the form of a new global department store purchased from R to the corporate funds of U and AA, as shown in attached Table of Crimes (2). The Defendant received political funds in the amount of KRW 21.7 million in a manner that is not specified in the Political Funds Act.

(ii) the use of a corporate credit card in the name of AA.

The Defendant was provided with one credit card (the card number: AM; hereinafter referred to as the "corporation card of this case") under the name of AA from Ra in March 2014, and was donated political funds equivalent to KRW 76,604,302 in total as shown in the attached Table of Crimes (3) from March 23, 2014 to July 1, 2015, by paying and using a sum of KRW 76,604,302 as shown in the attached Table of Crimes (3).

(b) Acceptance from AI;

On May 5, 2013, the defendant, who was promoted by AI and the defendant as management advisory members of AJ in form, was provided with one copy of the corporate body card for settlement purpose, such as personnel expenses, vehicle maintenance expenses, etc., and vehicle maintenance expenses.

Accordingly, from May 2, 2013 to July 9, 2015, the Defendant received 62,55,020 won in total, including lease fees for automobiles located within the framework of the AJ from AI (i.e., lease fees of KRW 61,201,420 + insurance premium of KRW 1,353,600), and 60,25,874 won in total, including employee pay of AO, who is an execution engineer of the Defendant. Meanwhile, the Defendant received one check card linked to the account of the AJ Industrial Bank of Korea, and settled and used the said card for the same period, and received 32,714,620 won in total with the said card for the same period, and received a contribution of 15,525,514 won in total by means not stipulated in the Political Funds Act (i.e., violation of the AJ Act).

On January 30, 2013, the Defendant demanded F to pay KRW 100 million as the deposit for pre-sale of apartment complex to F, and received KRW 100 million from AD Corporation and G City high-ranking positions in relation to the instant AF projects implemented through AH on January 30, 2013 and from F to request F to receive business convenience in favor of AH in relation to the establishment, progress, etc. of the project plan. As such, the Defendant received money or other valuables from the national bank account in the name of Q, a next-name account designated by AP, which is the next-name account designated by AP, to the effect that the Defendant requested F to receive business convenience in favor of AH. Accordingly, the Defendant received money or other valuables regarding the arrangement of matters belonging to the duties of AD Corporation

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness R, F and AI;

1. Partial statement of the witness AR in the court;

1. The first, fifth, and six-time suspect examination protocol of each prosecutor's office against the accused;

1. Each prosecutor's interrogation protocol concerning R;

1. AS copies of each prosecutor's statement and each copy of the prosecutor's protocol of statement, each prosecutor's office's protocol of statement (including the whole part of AS and AT) and each copy of the protocol of statement;

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of statement with respect to AU, AP, F, AI, AV, AX, AY, Z, and BA;

1. Each statement of AS, AP, BE, BF, and AT;

1. Investigation reports (A professional reports) and personal information (A) about the Yonhap News;

1. Investigation report (verification of the relationship between the AP and the BG), each family relation certificate;

1. Investigation report (verification that the AP has resided in Gangnam BH apartment), resident registration record card;

1. Investigation reports (verification of details of transactions by credit cards linked to hotels, entertainment taverns, etc.);

1. Investigation report (A's confirmation of the contents of conversations with the head of the same site) and telephone conversations;

1. A copy of the investigation report (a copy of the BI customer list, etc.), A name card, and a copy of the customer list;

1. Investigation report (Report on the result of execution of a warrant of search, seizure, verification - BJ, BKlin);

1. Chapter 34, in which an investigation report (ACR operations' a copy of daily sales account books); and 34, in a copy of daily sales account books of "AL", "BL meeting chief";

1. A investigation report (Compared to the "AL's daily sales account books and the related persons' telephone calls), A'A's entry and use account books (hereinafter referred to as "AL account books"), A's mobile phone address and address of A, R, and A's mutual telephone call and text account books of R, from January 15, 2016 to May 29, 2016, which was confirmed by the transmitting base station as "Gangnam-gu BM lending transactions" by the relevant party.

1. Investigation report (the current status of corporations and stockholders of the F Management, confirmation of the outlines of a AF development project executed by the F), details of stockholders change, and business information inquiry;

1. Investigation report (Attachment of printed photographs of a book A, 2013), book photographs;

1. Investigation report (the period of use specified in the AA AA Corporation Card (0122), details of use of the corporation card, copies of the BN account books, investigation report (absteination of the AJ corporate register) and each corporate register;

1. Investigation report (Attachment of related data to the Urban Planning Committee of G City on December 1, 2009);

1. Investigation report (Attachment of printed materials from the details of sending a master gift to R) (the printed materials from R) and output of a master gift file;

1. Investigation report (out of F’s AF enforcement project);

1. Investigation report (report on the result of execution of a warrant of search and seizure - 0 forum);

1. Five copies of the PC file, including investigation reports (Attachment of a copy of seizure documents), identification number certificates, membership lists (final) and organizational limits, indicated as the "BL Chairperson" among the copies of the PC file;

1. Investigation report (additional confirmed by comparison between the daily sales account book and the currency of related persons), entry and use account book of A'A' (hereinafter referred to as "AL account book"), address of A's mobile phone delivery base station on the date of entry and exit of A'AL, and details of A'A's and A's currency and text;

1. Two copies of an investigation report (A) (a) indicating that A was "M" at the time of entry into and departure from "AL and attaching a copy of the relevant sales account book), AL's daily sales account books, as "M";

1. A criminal investigation report (a) or a family relation register for siblings, etc.;

1. Investigation report (report on the results of tracking merchandise coupons, such as A, etc.), list of the use of merchandise coupons, resident inquiry (BP, Q, BR, BS, and B);

1. A criminal investigation report (attached to outputs on the Orum website), and outputs on the website;

1. An investigation report (Comparison of letters related to card tin and the settlement details of R-use corporation cards), 1. Investigation report [Adjustment of A-related articles (A-related articles (from August 8, 2004 to November 2016), 2013 to 2014)] 1. Investigation report (Adjustment of A-2013 to 2014, A mobile phone text messages, and the details of use of AA-related corporation cards, etc.)

1. An investigation report (A’s correction of the A’AL’ settlement table by each settlement item);

1. Investigation report (verification of the 'AL-related account books');

1. Account transaction details, each list of visitors, reply related to fact-finding, business registration certificate, automobile lease certificate, wage and salary income performance record, wage and salary income withholding receipt (AO), inquiry by the period of request for exclusion from Hyundai Capital, details of use of the corporate card, management advisory appointment contract, credit card settlement details, and issues regarding "A non-expanching issue" documents;

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act (the fact of acceptance of bribe, inclusive, the concurrent imposition of fines pursuant to Article 2(2) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes); Article 45(1) of the Political Funds Act (the fact of illegal acceptance of and acceptance of political funds, each of them together with imprisonment), Article 3 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the fact of acceptance of bribe, and the

1. A separate sentence for concurrent crimes;

Article 18 (3) and (1) 3 of the Public Official Election Act (the punishment on the crime of bribery and the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes shall be separately imposed on each

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [Article 2.B. 2. Na. b. Do. Do. ] Articles 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes concerning the crime of acceptance of bribe and the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, among the concurrent crimes for the punishment

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 and 65(1)6 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Additional collection:

(a) The crime of acceptance of bribe: The latter part of Article 134 of the Criminal Act (the amount additionally collected as KRW 19,465,500);

(b) Violation of the Political Funds Act: The latter part of Article 45(3) of the Political Funds Act [the amount additionally collected is KRW 253,829,816 (i.e., KRW 2.17 million + KRW 76,604,302 + KRW 15,525,514)]. The crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes: the latter part of Article 13 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the amount additionally collected is KRW 10

1. Order of provisional payment;

Judgment on the assertion of the defendant and defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Judgment on the crime of acceptance of bribe

A. Summary of the assertion

1) The facts charged in this part of the facts charged are calculated based on the daily sales account books of the restaurant of this case without credibility (hereinafter “instant account books”), and it cannot be deemed that the facts charged were specified in the facts charged.

2) A prosecutor calculated the accepted amount based on the instant book, but (1) the defendant or R did not verify the details of the accounts on the instant book, and there were parts that were either calculated excessively or falsely recorded in the instant book because the defendant or the defendant did not confirm the details of the accounts on the instant book, (2) the defendant did not reflect the amount of the orders or the amount in the instant book even though he paid the amount in cash once or three times a month, and (3) he did not set off the amount of the credit in the instant book by paying part of the amount of the money lent to ARER in the instant book, and stated to the effect that the amount of the credit was included in the amount of the credit payment after paying the credit amount by using a corporate card and using a credit card tin for the payment of the credit amount. In light of the fact that the Defendant and R did not properly state the amount of the credit amount in the “name” column of the instant book, it is difficult to recognize its credibility.

3) In light of the fact that the P secretary of the Presidential Secretariat was engaged in the affairs to coordinate opinions between the Cheongdae and the National Assembly and to assist the President, not the position to exercise any influence on local governments, investigation agencies, etc., and that the Defendant had completed most important authorization, permission, etc. related to the U business, the duties, etc. of local governments or investigation agencies related to U business cannot be deemed to be related to the Defendant’s duties.

4) Since the Defendant received the drinking value, etc. from R with a long-standing relationship of friendship, it is difficult to recognize the Defendant’s duty as a quid pro quo.

B. Judgment on the unspecified argument in the facts charged

The purport of Article 254(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act to specify the facts charged by specifying the date, time, place, and method of a crime is to limit the scope of trial against the court and facilitate the exercise of the defense right by specifying the scope of defense against the defendant. Thus, considering the nature of the indicted crime, it is sufficient to specify the facts causing the public prosecution by stating the time, time, place, method, and purpose, etc. to the extent that it can distinguish the facts causing the public prosecution from other facts in light of the nature of the indicted crime. Even if some of them are unclear, the facts charged may be specified along with the stated other matters. Thus, if there is no obstacle to the exercise of the defense right of the defendant, the effect of the public prosecution does not affect (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do

In light of the above legal principles, the public prosecutor specified the date and time and value of which the defendant received entertainment based on the books of this case as shown in the annexed list of crimes (1). Since this part of the facts charged specifically states the date, time, place, amount of acceptance of bribe, etc. of each crime, it cannot be deemed as impeding the exercise of the defendant's right to defense or that this part of the facts charged is not specified. The defendant and the defense counsel's assertion

C. Determination on the assertion on calculation of the accepted amount

1) Comprehensively taking account of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court, the credibility of the book of this case is determined to be sufficiently reliable as to “the details of the reservation and the text of the order (the tables number, the position of the person in charge, the name of the client, and the specific order details)” in the book of this case. Therefore, in full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, including the book of this case, the fact that the Defendant received entertainment from R as shown in the annexed crime list (1) can be sufficiently recognized. This part of the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion is rejected.

A) From August 10, 2015, R, while operating the instant restaurant from around August 10, 2015, prepared and managed the instant account book stating the sales details on each business day, and based on this, it has been settled monthly operating income of the instant restaurant. The AR, in the prosecutor’s investigation, is deemed to be the most accurate sales data because the instant account book is the basis for the settlement of accounts and the only supporting document. Based on this, the AR stated that the monthly account was “C” (in the investigation record 2911 pages).

B) The book of this case (i) table number for each business day, (ii) office number, and (iii) office number for each business day;

(3) The name of each customer, (4) specific order details (such as alcoholic beverages, food, water expenses, proxy driving expenses, tobacco, table expenses, etc.), (5) gross settlement amount, and (5) settlement details (cash, card, and credit classification) are written in detail. In light of the method of entry, etc. of the books of this case, it is not visible to have been written at will after the fact.

C) The employees of the instant restaurant, upon receipt of the reservation telephone or the customer’s misscam, shall first enter the part of the “the table number, the office book, and the customer name (the contractor’s name)” in the instant book under the direction of the AR, and then prepare the instant book in a way that the competent airline recorded the text from time to time when the customer orders drinking, food, etc. However, the total amount of settlement by the table table was directly recorded or made the employees enter the amount of AR unscam (three pages of the AR, and 400-402 pages of the investigation record). The instant book was prepared repeatedly and mechanically according to the business needs, and its credibility is high in light of its preparation process, etc.

D) Meanwhile, when a R receives a legal card one time in one month from R, it received the external payment by using the so-called card tin in the name of another card tin business operator through another card tin business operator. If the credit amount is too large, only a part of the credit amount is settled first, and the remainder is distributed equally in the total settlement amount of the account book of this case. The amount of R borrowed money is paid or the so-called card tin fee is compensated for some of the card tin fees, and the total amount of the settlement amount is calculated in excess of the amount according to the actual order because it added water expenses, table expenses, etc. omitted in the order details. However, in the account book of this case, the detailed orders such as reservation, alcoholic beverages, food, etc. were accurately stated, and if necessary, only some of the total amount was made, and the detailed order was not added."

In light of the fact that the AR’s statement contains any unfavorable fact to himself/herself, and there are cases where the total amount of settlement (total amount in the account book) is increased compared to the total amount according to the specific order details on the account book of this case, the AR’s statement appears to have been accurately stated in the account book of this case, but if necessary to receive R’s loan and credit payment or to preserve card-based recorders fees, it appears that the AR calculated a total amount of settlement.

E) In this Court, R also stated to the effect that “AR is not a person who makes a false claim for credit payment, but a person who makes a false statement to the effect that “AR is not a person who actually enters in the instant book.”

(six pages of a witness RR)

(ii) Other arguments.

A) The Defendant: (a) promised that two persons visit the Defendant and two persons; and (b) the said two persons are customers of R, on the part of “BL” column of the instant book.

There is room and there is a possibility that R would be present, so that it should be reflected in calculating the amount of the accepted bribery.

However, the amount of alcoholic beverages claimed in the name of R and the amount of alcoholic beverages claimed in the name of the defendant are separately stated in the book of this case (the next table Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6 through 9, 12), and in the case where the defendant and R are present in the book of this case (the name of the contractor), it appears that "BL National Assembly Chairperson and National Assembly Chairperson" are indicated in the column of "BL National Assembly Chairperson" (the next table Nos. 4, 5, 10, 11), and the AR does not state "BL National Assembly Chairperson" in the prosecutor's investigation that "in the case of drinking alcoholic beverages as the defendant and R with the defendant, it is stated as "BL National Assembly Chairperson" and "BL National Assembly Chairperson" (the investigation record No. 1294). This part of the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

B) The Defendant asserts to the effect that R added AR to the credit card payment fee and the part on which the Defendant directly settled the alcoholic beverage value, etc. should also be reflected in the calculation of the amount of the accepted acceptance. However, in light of the fact that the prosecutor calculated the amount of the accepted acceptance based on the "specific order details, not the "total payment amount of the book of this case", and that AR received the amount of KRW 1 million in cash from the Defendant as the liquor payment around the end of 2015, it is clear that the fact that AR received the amount of KRW 1 million as the liquor payment from the Defendant around the end of 2015, while the part on the settlement of cash claimed by the Defendant is entirely unsatisfying.

D. Determination on business relationship and compensation

1) Relevant statutes

Government Organization Act

Article 14 (1) (1) The Presidential Secretariat shall be established to assist the President.

(2) A Chief Secretary shall be assigned to the Presidential Secretariat, and he/she shall be appointed in political service.

【Organization of the Presidential Secretariat (amended by Presidential Decree No. 28046, May 11, 2017)】

The purpose of this Decree is to provide for the organization, scope of duties, and other necessary matters of the Presidential Secretariat.

Article 2 (Duties) The Presidential Secretariat shall assist the President in his/her duties. Article 4 (Chief Secretary)

(1) The Presidential Secretariat shall have a chief secretary.

(2) The chief secretary shall be a public official in political service.

Article 5. Appointment of Assistants, Administrative Officers and Administrative Officers

(1) The Office of the President shall have secretaries, senior administrative officers, and administrative officers under the Office of the President.

(2) The secretary and the appointed administrative officers shall be appointed from among the general service or the public officials in special service who belong to the Senior Civil Service, and the administrative officers from among the public officials in general service of Grades III through V or from among the public officials in special service equivalent to Grades III through V. The subordinate organizations and their duties to be assigned to the Presidential Secretariat under Article 9 shall

2) Relevant legal principles

The term "duty" in the crime of bribery includes not only a public official's duty under the control of law, but also an act closely related to his/her duty, or an act of assisting or influencing a person with decision-making authority (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do17797, Mar. 24, 2011). In addition, the term "duty" in the crime of bribery includes not only a duty prescribed by the law, but also a duty related thereto, a duty related thereto, and a duty that a public official is not actually in accordance with the division of duties in the past or in the future, but also a duty that falls under the ordinary official authority under the law, and other duties that a public official is to take in accordance with his/her position (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do1060, Jun. 13,

On the other hand, the crime of bribery is established when the public official's duties and money are in a quid pro quo relationship, and there is no need to consider the existence of a solicitation and the quid pro quo relationship, and there is no need to specify an act of performance of his duties (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Do2609, Dec. 26, 1997). Whether a certain profit gained by a public official constitutes a bribe as an unfair benefit in a quid pro quo relationship with a public official's duties and duties, relationship with a provider of benefits, relationship with a private relative between both parties, circumstance and time of receiving benefits, etc. In light of the above legal interests, the crime of bribery is established when the fair performance of duties and money of a public official are in a quid pro quo relationship. In addition, the issue of whether a certain profit obtained by a public official constitutes a bribe as an unfair benefit in a quid pro quo relationship with a public official's duties and duties, and it is also the standard for determining whether a public official receives such benefit from the public official's social trust.

Furthermore, in a case where a public official received money, valuables, or other benefits from a person subject to his/her duties from the person who received such money, valuables, or other benefits is repaid to him/her that he/she received from a public official, and thus, in light of the social norms, it cannot be deemed that there is no connection with his/her duties unless there are special circumstances, such as where it is deemed that there is merely an equivalent consideration, or where it is obviously recognized that there is an individual-friendly relationship with him/her, and where he/she received money or other benefits in connection with a public official’s duties, even if he/she received money or other valuables by lending a private-academic type, such money or other valuables shall be a bribe (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do6721, Jul. 26, 2002). In a case where a public official received, demanded, or promised money or other valuables that he/she received or promised to receive is indivisible in consideration of his/her duties (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do126424).

(iii) the facts of recognition

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the following facts can be acknowledged.

A) The Defendant and R Ma

After introducing R from the Defendant’s attachment, the Defendant became aware of the fact that the Defendant had been a severe economic labor report in the G market since 2006, and had been paid back to R. At the time, R was actually operating W, X, and Y, while running the apartment project.

B) Progress of U business

(1) On November 29, 2006, the G market designated and publicly announced the 49,900m of S Ilwon 49,900 as an urban development zone, and on the same day, designated AD construction as the project implementer.

(2) The BY consortium in which R actually operated W, etc. invested was selected as a private business entity of U on November 2, 2007, and the above consortium established BZ Co., Ltd. (the trade name of the company was changed to V on April 20, 201; hereinafter referred to as “V”).

(3) The initial urban development project plan was excluded from residential facilities (multi-familys), but the G Mayor changed the introduction of residential facilities (multi-familys) in the above urban development zone on December 7, 2009 following the resolution of the G City Urban Planning Committee on December 1, 2009. The announcement was made on December 9, 2009.

(4) Meanwhile, on May 26, 2009, the Defendant, who was a member of the 18th National Assembly member of the National Land and Sea Committee, was a representative of the Housing Act amendment that "not less than 50 stories in the free economic zone and special tourist zone or not less than 150 meters of multi-family housing shall be excluded from the application of the upper limit system." As the above amendment bill was implemented on April 5, 2010, U business located in the CA special tourist zone was not subject to the application of the upper limit system.

(5) On July 21, 2011 and July 21, 201, V filed an application for approval of a housing construction project plan that newly constructs buildings with a building area of 36,849m, total floor area of 656,593m, accommodation facilities, etc. on the site of the said urban development zone, and the head of the CA (CA) issued a disposition to approve the said housing construction project plan on October 7, 201. After that, on nine occasions from February 22, 2013 to June 14, 2016, the relationship between the Defendant and R (the amended housing construction project plan that alters the number of buildings, number of households, total floor area, construction executor, etc.).

(1) In 208 to 2009, R, a member of the National Land and Sea Committee, discussed that in the case of a high-class high-class building in a special tourist zone, the upper limit of the upper limit of the sales price is applied and the construction cost is at least three times more than the sales price of the government. There is a problem in the upper limit of the sales price, and the defendant responded to the purport that "the law was wrong" (the second, the second, the investigation record, 4790, 4791 pages).

(2) Around March 2016 to April 2016, when having known that R had become aware of the fact that there was an internal investigation or investigation into U business in the Dong site of G District Public Prosecutor’s Office, and around that time, at that time, the Defendant, who had been a secretary of the office of the presidential secretary of G Public Prosecutor’s Office, had to conduct an investigation into U business, but U sale would be completed and U sale would be completed and would be allowed to conduct an investigation. If there is no victim, why is the prosecutor’s office to conduct an investigation,” and requested U to complete or delay an investigation into U (U to request a request for an investigation (No. 4,5 pages, 4213, 4801). Around the end of April 201 to May 5, 2016, the Defendant sought the head of G District Public Prosecutor’s office having jurisdiction over the Dong site of G District to inquire about the investigation related to U business directly or by telephone (no. 487, 2038).

(3) In the prosecutor’s investigation, R stated that “I would like to be able to help the defendant as a matter of course because the position of the defendant was P,” as to the reason for requesting the defendant to refuse or delay investigation (No. 4801 of the investigation record). 44 R, around August 2016, was investigated into facts of suspicion, such as violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), etc., regarding U business, has escaped, and around that time, the defendant paid one so-called so-called “Sonphone” to the defendant (No. 1079, 1966 pages of the investigation record).

D) Economic status of R

R stated to the effect that even though there was no economic time at the time of ‘in this Court', it was difficult to do so, it was stated to the effect that it would have been in the situation that it would have to pay the liquor value of customers by lending money without any choice to proceed with U business (Witness R, 34, 35 pages).

4) Determination

In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this Court including the relevant laws, relevant legal principles, and facts, the Defendant received entertainment equivalent to KRW 19,465,550 as shown in the attached Table of Crimes (1) from R in relation to the duties of the presidential secretary, and the Defendant is fully aware of the fact in the process. This part of the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion is rejected.

A) The P secretary of the Presidential Secretariat shall be appointed under his/her jurisdiction to assist the President in the performance of the State affairs through the overall planning of the State affairs, the National Assembly, political parties, administrative affairs, and public peace and security reports, etc., and he/she shall take charge of the affairs related to the improvement of the government operation system, the understanding of the situation of policies and situations related to public security, and the understanding and analysis of trends in various incidents and accidents. As such, the Defendant, as the presidential secretary of the P secretary of the Presidential Secretariat, has the comprehensive duties concerning administrative autonomy and investigation, and thus, can be recognized as relevance between the duties of G City or CAB, etc., and the duties of the Defendant, as the local pending business of G City, can be recognized.

B) At the time, R was in need of close cooperation with G City, CAB, etc. in order to smoothly resolve various civil petition issues arising from the modification of design, etc. while carrying out the U project. Since G City, CAB, etc. as a secretary of the P secretary of the Presidential Secretariat was in a position that may affect the overall administrative affairs handled by G City, CAB, etc. in relation to U project, there was sufficient motive to offer a bribe to the Defendant in comparison with the administrative issues that may arise in relation to the progress of U project in the future.

C) The reason why R offers the Defendant’s entertainment is also stated to the effect that, in this court, it would have caused damage to U business, etc. from a third party or would have caused difficulties, the Defendant would be able to prevent them from doing so to a certain extent (see, e.g., the witness RR page 27,28 pages), and in light of the fact that R has difficulty in finding a motive to make a false statement even when R bears the risk of criminal punishment, it is difficult for him/her to find a motive to make a false statement, the said statement of R is highly reliable. Moreover, R has led to a confession of criminal facts related to this part in its offering of bribe case (as, Busan District Court Decision 2016Da853, 2017Ma104, Jun. 8, 201).

D) The Defendant is a person who was in the position of the Secretary General of the Presidential Secretariat through a member of the 18th National Assembly and the National Land and Sea Committee. Although a person on such high-ranking position has long been given entertainment equivalent to the total amount of KRW 19,465,50 for about nine months from R that may be subject to his/her duties, it is sufficient to doubt the fairness of the performance of his/her duties from the general public.

E) In light of the fact that R, a member of the National Assembly, pointed out the problems of the sales price ceiling system related to U U business, R requested the defendant who was a secretary of the presidential secretary of P secretary of P secretary office to delay the investigation, and R paid one of the defendant's 's 's 's 's 'phone' at the time of escape to the case, such as the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), etc., it cannot be seen that the defendant and R merely maintained a private friendly relationship.

F) From time to time during about nine months, the Defendant treated high-class jun and jun as food together with a mixed person or his son in the instant restaurant and treated the drinking value, etc., and even based on the minimum cost required for the entertainment, the total sum of KRW 19,465,500 is up to KRW 19,465,50. In light of the details and amount of the receipt of the above benefits, it is difficult to deem that the Defendant was provided merely due to the need for each subparagraph

G) The Defendant asserts to the effect that R only paid the drinking value, etc. on the basis of personal friendly relationship between the Defendant and the Defendant, and that it is irrelevant to U business. However, as the Defendant’s argument, the Defendant stated to the effect that: (i) even if R and the Defendant was deadly in a fluorial relationship, such circumstance does not appear to be a reason that is incompatible with the facts charged; (ii) R may cause a wind-free situation if there is difficulties in fishing projects, and (iii) R paid the Defendant’s drinking value, etc. by thinking that R may cause a wind-free situation; and (iv) it seems that R’s offering of benefit would considerably affect not only the relationship between the Defendant and the Defendant, but also the fact that R would have contributed to the fact that the Defendant was a person in a fluorial relationship with the President and a person in a pure friendly relationship. (iii) R

In light of the fact that offering large-amount of entertainment is difficult to easily understand in light of the empirical rule, the above argument by the Defendant is difficult to accept.

2. Determination on the violation of each of the Political Funds Act

A. Summary of the assertion

1) Although the period of receipt of merchandise coupons from August 31, 201 to December 2014 in the facts charged under Article 2. A. (1) of the judgment, the period of receipt of merchandise coupons is "from August 31, 2011 to the date of receipt of merchandise coupons", this part of the facts charged is not the date of receipt of merchandise coupons actually by the defendant, but merely because it is the date of purchase of merchandise coupons in U and AA, etc., or

2) The Defendant does not constitute a person engaged in political activities during a period other than that of the 18th National Assembly members.

3) Although the Defendant received gift certificates from R or used the pertinent corporate card after being provided with the instant corporate card, it is merely a courtesy gift in accordance with the friendship relationship, and the receipt of vehicles, etc. from the AI side as a member advisory member of the AJ, which is irrelevant to political activities.

B. Judgment on the unspecified argument in the facts charged

This part of the facts charged is that the date and time of the receipt of merchandise coupons of the defendant from August 31, 201 to April 2014 are "the date and time of purchase" for each merchandise coupon and the date and time of collection (use) for each merchandise coupon in the crime list (2) attached to the indictment. It is true that the scope of the time and time is somewhat wide, and there is no room to further specify the date and time of the crime by other objective data, such as the defendant's statement. However, it is sufficiently possible to distinguish merchandise coupons from other merchandise couponss by each merchandise coupon number, date and time of purchase, collection (use), collection (use), collection point, user's name, etc., and it is deemed that the defendant's statement and R's statement in the record of this case are not impossible to impeachment them more concrete than the date and time of the crime, and therefore, it is reasonable to view that this part of the facts charged was specified. This part of the defendant and the defense counsel do not accept this part of the charges.

C. Determination as to the establishment of each crime of violating the Political Funds Act

1) Relevant legal principles

The purpose of the former Political Funds Act (amended by Act No. 14074 of March 3, 2016; hereinafter referred to as the "Act of Political Funds") is to contribute to the sound development of democratic politics by guaranteeing the proper provision of political funds, securing the transparency of revenues and expenditures by disclosing the details thereof, and preventing any illegality related to political funds (Article 1). Accordingly, Article 45(1) of the Political Funds Act provides that persons who receive political funds (referring to those who commit the act of violation as its members in the case of political parties, supporters' associations, corporations or other organizations) shall be punished in light of the same Act. The term "political funds" is reasonable in this context to ensure that at least 10 political parties (including party members' organizations), persons who are elected, candidates for public election or candidates, and persons who are to become political parties or persons who are to become political parties, and persons who are to provide money or other goods for the purpose of establishing the Political Funds Act, and thus, it is reasonable to interpret the term of "political funds funds" to those who are subject to the amendment of the Political Funds Act.

Meanwhile, the establishment of a crime does not affect whether a person who received political funds has actually used such funds for political activities after the receipt of the fixed number of political funds by means not stipulated in the Political Funds Act reaches the expiration of the crime of receiving political funds (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do2612, Mar. 12, 2009; 2010Do17886, Jun. 9, 201).

(ii) the facts of recognition

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the following facts can be acknowledged.

A) On September 2006, the Defendant was a justifiable military unit, and around February 2007, the Defendant served as a policy severe alert for the candidates for CB President through M of the election campaign for the presidential candidate for the political party competition.

B) On April 10, 2008, the Defendant launched as a candidate for the National Assembly member of the 18th National Assembly in N District for the 18th National Assembly member, and won in election. From 2008, 5, 30 to 29 May 2012, 2012, the Defendant was appointed as the 18th National Assembly member. The Defendant was appointed as the 18th National Assembly member on June 27, 2008 as the 18th National Assembly member. The Defendant was appointed as the 18th National Assembly member on June 27, 2008 from the end of July 2008, and was appointed as a member of the National Assembly Committee for Recommendation of Public Officials from January 201 to March 2012.

C) On July 30, 2012, when the defendant who was a member of the National Election Commission recommending a candidate for public office filed a complaint against the defendant on the suspicion that he/she received KRW 300 million in relation to the recommendation of a specific person as a candidate by the political party fromCC (hereinafter referred to as "publically unconstitutional case"), the J party Ethics Committee decided to dismiss the defendant on August 6, 2012, and the above resolution was finalized on August 16, 2012.

D) On September 25, 2012, the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office issued a non-prosecution disposition on charges of violating the Public Official Election Act to the Defendant. On April 8, 2013, the Defendant, who was transferred to the J political party, and was in the custody of the head of the J Party Election Planning Team, a non-official organization in preparation for the 'sixth and fourth local elections' from February 2014 to March 201, and was in charge of the head of the J Party Election Planning Team from May 13, 2014 to June 2014.

E) Around July 2014, the Defendant considered the election campaign for the National Assembly members of the CD local constituency. Around August 2014, the Defendant made up for the establishment of an organization to formulate a sustainable development plan and action plan in the N area. Around that time, the Defendant established a forum on November 25, 2014.

F) On July 10, 2015, the Defendant was appointed as the Secretary of the Presidential Secretariat, and was in office as the Secretary of the Presidential Secretariat by June 8, 2016.

3) Whether a person constitutes "person engaged in political activities"

In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the defendant's status as a "person engaged in political activities" during the period specified in the facts charged in violation of each Political Fund Act shall be examined as follows: ① the period of National Assembly member (. 31. 201. 5. 201. 5. 29) and ② the period of his/her activities by the J Party (. . 30. - 15. - 8. 201. - 8. 8. 201. 8.) and ③ the period of his/her expulsion from the J Party (. 16. - 2013 April 7, 2013), ④ the period of his/her expulsion from the J Party (i. 2015. 10 to September 25, 2015) and (ii) the period of his/her election of National Assembly member after his/her retirement from the Presidential Secretariat (i.e., the election of National Assembly member) and (ii) the period of his/her membership.

(B) the period during which the Party was working (excluding the period of expulsion);

Comprehensively taking into account the facts and circumstances revealed earlier, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant continued to engage in political activities except for the period expelled by the J Party after the expiration of the term of office of the 18th National Assembly member and the period before the appointment as the P secretary of the Presidential Secretariat.

① On June 1, 2012, the term of office for the Defendant served as a member of the Committee on Recommendation of Candidates for Public Officials in the early 2012 Police Officers. On June 2012, 2012, the Defendant, upon the expiration of the term of office for a member of the National Assembly, expressed his/her intent to join the L substitute Election Campaign F, or, upon the request of a political party during June 2012, he/she would join the chairman of the Committee on Party Members of the J Party N District at the request of the J Party. On July 16, 2012, the Defendant was actively engaged in activities in the J Party on the grounds that he/she would be appointed as the Vice Director of the Female Research Institute affiliated with the J Party. However, on August 16, 2012, his/her activities were suspended due to the expulsion from the J Party.

② The Defendant participated in the meetings of “CE” group, “CF” group composed of the 18th first election National Assembly members of the J Party, “CF” group, “N party executives, former and incumbent high-ranking public officials, heads of financial institutions, companies, political reporters, etc., from time to time (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 1530-1550, 4956-4985, Feb. 2, 2014 to March 3, 2014). (3) The Defendant, a non-official organization, established the Voluntary Election Planning Team, a “6-4 local election” group in preparation for the “6-4 local election, etc. from February 2, 2014 to May 2, 2014, the Central Election Planning Headquarters of the J Party and the Local Election Planning Group of the National Assembly members of the Republic of Korea on July 18, 2014 to April 28, 2014.

④ On April 16, 2015, BB, the director of the organization planning division of the defendant's external history and Opo Forum, planned to raise the success of the 20th National Assembly members in the election of the 20th National Assembly members and tried to secure the responsible party members belonging to the local constituency party. The defendant also recommended the solicitation of the 40 to 50 to 40 to 50 members of the responsible party upon the defendant's request (3243 pages of investigation records). CG representative director AV also stated that the 15 members of the J party were requested by the defendant to recruit the 15 members of the 20th National Assembly members (3135 pages of investigation records), and the defendant appears to have made a statement to prepare for the 25th National Assembly members of the local party at the time of the election of the 20th National Assembly members (25th National Assembly members of the 2000-Gu party).

⑤ From August to September, 2014 to the prosecution’s investigation, AYdo’s representative director, CH, made a statement to the effect that the Defendant was planning to leave the election for the 20th National Assembly members of Nan District, and that the Defendant was planning to leave the Nan District 20th National Assembly members of the Nan District, and that the Defendant was planning to establish the 0 forum-based organization (around 4242 pages of investigation record).

6) On July 10, 2015, the Defendant made a statement to the effect that he was appointed as a secretary of the Presidential Secretariat and decided on the 20th election of the National Assembly members for the President of the Union (No. 4850 pages of investigation records). BC, which was the secretary of the Secretariat of the National Assembly for the National Assembly, had experienced the President from participating in the 20th election of the National Assembly members of the National Assembly in accordance with the direction of BD on January 2016. However, the Defendant: (a) prepared a document stating that he was appointed as a secretary of the Presidential Secretariat on July 10, 2015; (b) prepared a document stating that he was N in the center of any kind of political election; and (c) held a cross-party conference related to the 20th election of the National Assembly members of the National Assembly; and (d) held a counter-party conference related to the 20th election of the National Assembly members of the National Assembly; and (d) the Defendant appears to have withdrawn the 20th election.

② During the pertinent period, the Defendant’s specific political activities were reported to local newspapers, etc. (investigative records 4817-4849).

C) As seen in Section 2.B., it is difficult to view the Defendant’s period of expulsion from the J Party as constituting “a person engaged in political activities” as provided in the Political Funds Act during the period of expulsion from the J Party.

D) As seen in Section 3.B., it is difficult to view the Defendant’s period of service as a secretary of the P secretary of the Presidential Secretariat to constitute “person engaged in political activities” as provided in the Political Funds Act.

E) As seen in Paragraph 4.B., it is difficult to view that the Defendant constitutes “persons engaged in political activities” as provided in the Political Funds Act during the period after the Defendant retired from the P secretary of the Presidential Secretariat.

4) Specific determination

A) Acceptance of gift certificates from R [Article 2. A. 1]

(1) Whether the defendant constitutes a "person engaged in political activities"

As seen earlier, as indicated in the facts constituting a crime in the judgment, the Defendant is a person who was elected to an election for public office from August 31, 201 to May 29, 2012, and is a person who engages mainly in activities directly related to a political party or an election for public office from May 30, 201 to August 15, 2012, and from April 8, 2013 to 2014, and is a person who engages mainly in political activities as provided for in the Political Fund Act.

(2) In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court as to whether the Defendant received the gift certificates for political activities, it is reasonable to view that R provided gift certificates for the Defendant’s political activities.

① The R consistently stated that, with respect to the reasons for the issuance of gift certificates to the Defendant, from the investigative agency to this court, “it was deemed that it was excessive to grant gift certificates equivalent to KRW 2,300,000 at one time,” the Defendant issued multiple gift certificates to the reporter on the ground that there was a secret letter in the National Assembly member period, and the Defendant had to grant gift certificates to the reporter after the National Assembly member’s completion.” (The Defendant also stated that “the Defendant’s gift certificates intending to go to the reporter,” and that “the Defendant made a statement on the one hand, 2, 3, and 4223 pages of the record of investigation).”

② The Defendant also stated in this Court that “R was taking the gift certificates to the effect that “the Defendant was taking the gift certificates to receive money from many people and to receive money in an unofficial manner” (the Defendant’s writing page eight pages of the Defendant’s newspaper) :

③ Under this law, the Defendant was working for a so-called CE politics at the 6.4 local election, and there was little comments that the Defendant would come to the J.S. candidate for the 20th National Assembly member special election of the CD National Assembly member around July 2014. Thereafter, the Defendant made a statement to the effect that “The Defendant would have been able to go to the N.N. National Assembly member in the future due to the establishment of the Orum (3,4,20 pages of the witness R),” and that R was aware that at the time of issuance of gift certificates, the Defendant was working as a senior executive of the J. Party or as a preparation for the 20th National Assembly member election.

④ The Defendant issued gift certificates as a nominal gift based on R’s pro-friendly relationship.

However, it argues that the value of gift certificates received by the defendant is too large in terms of a simple friendly gift, and that R caused by a cause to a death is paid to the defendant's wife in the future of the defendant's wife in each year from September 2012 to February 2016 (the investigation record 303, 1898 pages), and R R has pure friendly relationship between the defendant's wife and the defendant's wife in each year from September 2012 to February 2016 (the investigation record 303, 1898 pages);

In light of the fact that sending a high-amount gift certificate to a person other than the defendant is very exceptional, and CR stated to the effect that "no person has paid a high-amount gift certificate as above" in this court (21 pages of witness R), etc., it is difficult to obtain the defendant's above assertion.

⑤ Although the family members or relatives of the Defendant were to use gift certificates, they are merely consumption methods after the violation of the Political Funds Act led to the completion of the crime of violating the Political Funds Act, and whether the Defendant actually used gift certificates for political activities does not affect the establishment of the crime. 6R led to the confession of the criminal facts related to this part in the case of violation of the Political Funds Act (In Busan District Court Decision 2016Da853, 2017Gahap104, 2017).

(3) It is difficult to clearly understand the receipt date of merchandise coupons because the date and time of receipt of merchandise coupons of the defendant from August 31, 201 to around 2014, and only the "date and time of purchase for each merchandise coupon for each merchandise coupon and the "date of collection (use)" are specified in the list of crimes attached to the indictment. It is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the defendant received merchandise coupons from the "date and time of purchase for each merchandise coupon" to the "date of collection (use)" to the "date and time of collection (use)" as stated in the indictment. Thus, if part or whole of the above period overlaps with the period stipulated in the J Party, it shall be interpreted most favorable to the defendant, and if the defendant received merchandise coupons during the period stipulated in the J Party, it may be recognized that the defendant received merchandise coupons worth KRW 21,700,000 in total as political funds (see attached Table 2).

B) Provision of corporate cards from R [Article 2. A. 2]

(1) Whether the defendant constitutes a "person engaged in political activities"

As seen earlier, as stated in the facts constituting a crime, the Defendant is a person who mainly engages in activities directly related to a political party or an election for public office from March 23, 2014 to July 1, 2015, and is provided for in the Political Funds Act.

(2) The following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court as to whether the Defendant was provided for political activities, namely, R consistently offered a corporate card to the effect that it would be used from an investigative agency to a political journalist, etc. to contact with meals. The Defendant stated that he provided a corporate card to a political journalist, etc. (No. 4,20 pages, 29, 2977 pages, etc. of the witness RR), ② The R delivered the corporate card of this case to the Defendant without any change with an officer or employee of A, and the Defendant appears to have not been aware of the fact that he used the corporate card of this case (No. 1970 pages). ③ R was aware that the Defendant was an executive officer of the political party or prepared for election of National Assembly members of this case; ⑤ Defendant 1 was aware of the fact that he was using the corporate card of this case from an investigative agency of this case’s 20th anniversary of the fact that he was using the corporate card of this case’s 40th anniversary of this case’s political information.

C) Acceptance from AI (criminal facts No. 2.b. b.)

(1) Whether the defendant constitutes a "person engaged in political activities"

As seen earlier, the Defendant, as indicated in the facts constituting a crime, constitutes a person who mainly engages in activities directly related to a political party or an election for public office from May 2, 2013 to July 9, 2013 and is provided for in the Political Funds Act.

(2) In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court as to whether the defendant was provided for political activities, it is reasonable to view that the AI provided a vehicle, etc. for political activities of the defendant.

① With respect to the reasons why the AI, a representative director of the AJ, provided a vehicle, etc. to the Defendant from the investigative agency to the present court, the AI consistently stated that it provided a vehicle, driver, etc. without any specific purpose for the Defendant who provided a political activity (2, 11th, investigation records, 144 pages of the witness AI), on the ground that it is difficult for the AI to find motives to make false statements to be unfavorable to it, in light of the fact that it is difficult for the AI to take criminal punishment against the Defendant to find false statements, such as the vehicle and driver’s benefits, etc., to be used for arresting the person from the Defendant during the early 2013 Police Officer, and that it was stated in the manner of support to the company and the Defendant in the form of advisory contract.

② The Defendant asserts that, as a management advisory member of the AJ, the Defendant actually engaged in advisory activities, such as advising the AI on patentization of technology necessary for the contract with the CJ corporation and fund management. However, the other advisory members of the AJ at the PJ office, who were present at the AJ office, responded to specific questions on the side of the company and set up business districts, etc., while the Defendant did not actually attend the office and did not have any official questioning on the pending issues of the company (16,19, 146 pages of the witness AI). CAI consistently stated that “the Defendant did not actually act as the management advisory member of the AJ in the prosecutor’s office and this court,” and the prosecutor’s office stated that “It is difficult to accept the Defendant’s assertion that there was no objective data on the Defendant’s provision of advisory services in accordance with the AJ contract, etc. in light of the fact that it was difficult to view that there was no objective data on the Defendant’s provision of advisory services in the AJ contract.”

③ Although the Defendant asserts to the effect that the Defendant was commissioned as an advisory member of the AJ through a legitimate resolution of the board of directors, the Defendant stated to the effect that “AI” Defendant was unable to provide the vehicle, etc. with the corporate funds of the AJ without any grounds, that it prepared a written contract for appointment of management advisory members and convened the board of directors (2 pages of the AAI, investigation records, 145, 1446 pages), and that “the aforementioned vehicle, etc. was provided,” the AJ appears to have concluded a formal advisory contract with the Defendant for the purpose of supporting the Defendant’s vehicle, etc.

(4) In this court, AI stated that "the defendant made an Orum around 2014, and actually continued to appear in the election as a former member of the National Assembly." In light of the foregoing, it is reasonable to view that AI was aware that the defendant was a person in political activities at the time of providing a vehicle, etc. to the defendant.

⑤ In early 2013, the AI stated to the effect that it was introduced to the effect that the Defendant was in a political person in the CE System and directly communicating with the President in the early 2013 police officer, and that the Defendant was in a friendly manner with the Defendant (the witness AI record page 3, 14 pages). In light of this, the AI expectations that the Defendant was in a political person at the time and was introduced to the Defendant.

3. Judgment on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes

A. Summary of the assertion

The Defendant did not receive KRW 100 million from F under the pretext of arranging matters pertaining to the duties of public officials of G City or AD Corporation in connection with the instant AF project. The Defendant did not receive from F any such referral, but did not actually act as such.

B. Determination

1) Relevant legal principles

Article 3 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes is established by 'the pretext of acting as a broker for matters belonging to the duties of a public official'. "Good offices" generally refer to 'the act of mediating or taking over certain matters between a certain person and his/her other party'. As such, "Good offices" refer to acts of assisting a public official in delivering his/her intentions to a public official, promoting convenience, or exercising influence upon him/her so that a decision is made in the direction of a party at the request of the public official. In such cases, duties of public official are included in lawful duties, and brokerage or its contents are not specified in detail, and it is established that the above crime is established regardless of which good offices are actually arranged. Whether there is a quid pro quo relationship between brokerage and delivery of matters belonging to public officials' duties, and whether there is an indivisible relation between an intermediary and delivery of money and delivery of money and delivery of such money and delivery in consideration of the contents of the relevant good offices, whether there is an indivisible relation between an intermediary and delivery of money and delivery of such money and delivery.

2) Determination

In full view of the following facts and circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant received KRW 100 million under the pretext that he/she arranged matters belonging to the duties of AD Corporation and C high-ranking public officials of G City with respect to the instant AF projects. The defendant and his/her defense counsel are not acceptable.

A) On January 30, 2013, F transferred KRW 100 million to the account in the name of Q as designated by the Defendant on January 30, 2013, upon request by the Defendant, “AP’s pre-tax revenue amounting to KRW 100 million, which was in a relationship with the Defendant.”

B) At the time, F was promoting the instant AF project while operating AH, an executing agent of the instant AF project.

C) From January 2013, F was in a situation where AD Corporation, which was in charge of the instant AF business, demanded AD Corporation to introduce accommodation facilities and sludge with AD Corporation around January 2013. At the time, AD was in need of resolving issues such as G and design change, authorization and permission, and civil petitions arising from the Corporation in order for AD to smoothly carry out the said business. Accordingly, on January 30, 2013, F paid KRW 100 million to the Defendant who had a big influence on G City and AD Corporation from the member of the National Assembly of the local constituency in G city, GD Corporation, etc. to receive assistance in the instant AF business. From that time to that time, the Defendant continued to cooperate in the said business by the person in charge of AD Corporation until 2014, it would be desirable if there was an atmosphere where AD Corporation’s meetings with AD president were changed, and the president has been provided with specific and more convenience to AD 2, which would have been given to AD’s president’s contact with the said business.

In the Defendant’s book of February 12, 2013, “FF business site CN, commercial building within the AH, CM complex”) stated “1. CL (AF business site CN, commercial building)” and “CO.” (2. 1526 pages of investigation records). In light of the fact that F is consistent with F’s above statement and it is difficult for F to find any motive to make a false statement while under criminal punishment risk, the F’s statement is highly reliable.

D) The F made a statement to the effect that “K was ‘the first investigation of the prosecution in 2014’ with regard to the time when the CK was met, and that “F made a statement to the effect that it was ‘the fifth investigation of the prosecution in 2013,’ and that “CK was not memoryd’ in this court. However, in light of the fact that F made a statement to the effect that “F continued to provide convenience for the AF projects of this case from the end of January 2013 to the end of 2014”, it is within the extent that it can be reasonably understood as being confused with some of memorys in the detailed parts during the process of identifying the date when the time has passed. Therefore, it is difficult to view that F’s statement was not credibilityd solely on such circumstances.

E) The Defendant asserts to the effect that F was merely taking into account the Defendant’s social status and role as a friendly relative of the Defendant, and that F was to bear KRW 100 million on his own with the mind of supporting the Defendant in the water depth. However, in light of the fact that ① KRW 100 million given by the Defendant is deemed to have been provided simply by the demand in the subparagraphs or the subcommittee, the amount is too large, ② the Defendant was remitted via the borrowed account, ③ the Defendant was transferred KRW 100 million, ③ the F was not long from the date of delivery of KRW 100 million, and the Defendant appears to have requested specific requests for the instant AF business to the Defendant, the above argument by the Defendant is not persuasive.

F) On April 15, 2014, following the revision to the construction permission of the instant AF business, the Defendant asserted that F’s request for the relaxation of the conditions of the hotel or the gate that was not included in the construction permission on February 2013 would be contradictory at the time. However, the Defendant’s request for the mitigation of the conditions of the hotel or the gate that was not included in the construction permission on February 2013 was made between the CP Co., Ltd. and the AF Co., Ltd., Ltd., which had the execution agent of the said business, was made on April 5, 2011 as the “sale, cultural and assembly facilities, accommodation facilities, business facilities (offices),” the introduced facilities were written as “international conference rooms, sales facilities, food facilities, officetels, business hotel, game-related support facilities” (the investigative record 236), and the F witness also made it difficult to accept the Defendant’s request for the introduction of the above 301-year hotel and the above 15-year hotel (OF).

Reasons for sentencing

1. The scope of applicable sentences under the Act, the crime of acceptance of bribe, the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes: Imprisonment with prison labor for not more than three years and not more than nine months and fines not less than 19,465,550, but not more than 48,63,

(b) Offenses of each political fund: Imprisonment with prison labor for not more than three years and not more than nine months;

2. Scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

(a) Crimes of acceptance of bribe and violation of the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes;

1) The acceptance of bribe

[Scope of Recommendation] Type 2 (not less than one million won but less than three million won) basic area (one year to three years) of acceptance of bribe (special person)

2) Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes: The sentencing criteria are not set.

3) Criteria for handling multiple crimes: The crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, for which the sentencing criteria set forth and the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes for which no sentencing guidelines are set are set are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal

B. The sentencing criteria for each offense of violating the Political Funds Act are not set.

3. Determination of sentence;

The circumstances of the crime of bribery in this case: ① The defendant, who was the secretary of the P secretary of the Presidential Secretariat, provided entertainment equivalent to KRW 19,465,50 in connection with his duties from R. The criminal liability is very heavy in that the public confidence in the integrity and fairness of senior public officials has been significantly undermined. In particular, the defendant committed the crime in this case without disregarding the people's integrity and fairness that fit for him even though he was in the position of being in need of high level of integrity. ② The crime of the violation of each of the Political Funds Act was contributed to the political funds of KRW 253,829,816 in total by the defendant, who was working as a member of the National Assembly, was contributed to the fund of KRW 253,829,816 in order to secure transparency of political funds and prevent any malpractice related to political funds, thereby seriously impairing the purpose of legislation of the Political Funds Act to contribute to the sound development of democratic politics, ③ It is highly likely that the amount of punishment in this case belongs to AD and a public official under the pretext of the Act.

○ favorable circumstances: The defendant's acceptance of money and valuables or benefits is mostly recognized and against such inappropriate conditions; the defendant has no record of criminal punishment heavier than that previous or suspended execution; and the defendant seems to have faithfully engaged in parliamentary activities as a political person while in office as a member of the National Assembly.

The acquittal portion

1. The point of acceptance of bribe

A. The point of acceptance of bribe Nos. 2 and 3 of the annexed list of crimes

1) Summary of the facts charged

On September 25, 2015, the Defendant received a bribe equivalent to KRW 620,00 in relation to the duties of a public official by receiving payment in lieu of KRW 620,000,00 from R, such as the liquor value of the Defendant.

2) Determination

A) Criminal facts in a criminal trial ought to be established based on strict evidence with probative value, which leads to a judge to have a reasonable doubt. Therefore, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the extent that such conviction would lead to such a conviction, even if there is a doubt of guilt, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense contradictory or uncomfortable dismissal, it should be determined in the interests of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do14487, Apr. 28, 201).

B) Comprehensively taking account of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, it is difficult to view that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to whether the Defendant was offered entertainment from R at the same time and place, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

① In the daily sales account book of the instant restaurant on September 25, 2015, the term “tebable number: R3, R, guest name (pre-contractor name): The term “BL N: 2, Nz, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1 in so far as possible: so far: the total settlement amount: 8,000 won: credit and the settlement amount: 878,000 won: credit and the calculation of the number of the BU president: (In investigation record, 1092 pages). The fact that the Defendant drinks and drinks as above at the instant restaurant on September 25, 2015 is recognized.

② Meanwhile, around September 25, 2015, AR had been directly paid KRW 200,000 in cash from the Defendant around September 25, 2015 with the amount of money used by the Defendant around September 25, 2015.

The defendant stated that he was paid at the time of the drilling that he was unsatisfy," and around that time, CM operated by AR from April 7, 2013 to February 14, 2016, and CM and the restaurant of this case, who tried to perform the accounting work of the restaurant of this case, were in charge of the preparation of sales account books. There was a fact that the defendant paid the drinking value in cash two times around the life saving, but the defendant stated that the immediately preceding employee was in charge of issuing a certificate of 50,000 won in cash (the investigative record 2235 pages). The defendant paid the amount of KRW 1,00,000 to AR around September 25, 2015.

③ In this Court, AR stated that “the above one million won received from the Defendant is not well-known to memory how it was reflected in the instant book.” In fact, the instant book submitted by the Prosecutor as evidence does not indicate the part in which the Defendant settled the drinking value, etc. in cash.

④ The restaurant of this case started business around August 10, 2015. According to the instant book, based on September 24, 2015, it appears that there was no credit payment under the Defendant’s name, and the daily sales account book dated September 25, 2015 is indicated as KRW 878,000 in the vicinity of the Defendant’s total settlement amount of KRW 1 million.

⑤ Considering the foregoing circumstances, the possibility that the Defendant would have paid the liquor value, etc. related to this part of the facts charged in cash at the instant restaurant around September 2015 cannot be ruled out.

B. The point of acceptance of bribe listed in the annexed list (1) Nos. 12 and 32

1) Summary of the facts charged

On November 19, 2015, and May 30, 2016, the Defendant received a bribe of KRW 730,000,00 in total, including the Defendant’s drinking value, from R, from the instant restaurant (i.e., KRW 175,000 on November 19, 2015 + KRW 55,00 on May 30, 2016) instead of payment, and received a bribe of KRW 730,00 in relation to its duties.

2) Determination.

A) In a case where the defendant gives entertainment along with the mineer and paid the money required for the acceptance of the bribe by the mineer, the defendant's acceptance of the bribe must be acknowledged first of all, the defendant's acceptance of the bribe should be based on the amount of the bribe by having the former amount and having the amount of the bribe. If the amount of the expense required by each person is unclear, the amount of the bribe must be equally divided and recognized as the amount of the bribe by the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 99Do5294, Oct. 12, 2001; 2009Do8158, Oct. 15, 2009).

B) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, comprehensively taking account of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the Defendant and the daily entertainment amount of 905,000 won (=350,000 won on November 9, 2015 + 55,000 won on May 30, 2016) cannot be deemed as the value of entertainment for which the Defendant received total amount of 198,50 won (i.e., the amount corresponding to the Defendant’s portion out of the above costs + 87,500 won on Nov. 9, 2015 + 11,000 won on May 30, 2016). Thus, it is difficult to view that there was no reasonable evidence that the Defendant offered entertainment amount exceeding 15,000 won on May 30, 2016 to the extent that there was no reasonable evidence to acknowledge the remainder of the Defendant’s bribery amount of 15,000 won on which the Defendant offered the bribe.

(1) "BL's name" of the daily sales account book dated November 19, 2015 is written as "BL' 2, 2016, 5, 30." and "BL's name" of the daily sales account book of 2016, 5, 30. The term "BL's name" is written as "three names (BU) of the National Assembly Chairperson." The part relating to the facts charged in this part of the account book of this case is written as follows (Investigation Record 1102, 117 pages):

A person shall be appointed.

② The term “BU National Assembly member”, “BU”, “BL member”, “BL member”, “2”, and “3” mean the number of persons who have done a duty together with the Defendant, etc. (such as a witness AR tape page 23 pages, etc.). In addition, the Defendant and R, together with the instant restaurant, appears to have spent the cost of drinking and eating in the instant restaurant.

③ In light of the fact that the AR made a statement to the effect that three persons on May 30, 2016, recorded in the daily sales account book as of May 30, 2016, “at least three persons who visited the restaurant of this case with the Defendant and R, are the customers of the Defendant,” etc. (Defendant AR No. 24 pages), it is difficult to readily conclude that those persons who visited the restaurant of this case, together with the Defendant and R, are the customers of the Defendant.

(0) Meanwhile, even if all of the records of this case are examined, the amount of the accepted bribery cannot be specified for each participant, and thus, the amount of the accepted bribery shall be determined by dividing the total amount of entertainment by the number of participants. If the defendant considers the above conduct as a R guest in the most favorable manner to be the defendant and calculate the cost of the defendant's contact, it shall be a total of 198,500 won as shown below:

A person shall be appointed.

C. The point of acceptance of bribe listed in [Attachment 1] Nos. 13, 21, 24

1) Summary of the facts charged

From November 20, 2015 to January 7, 2016, the Defendant received a bribe of 4.270,000 won in relation to the Defendant’s duties by receiving payment on behalf of the Plaintiff, instead of the Plaintiff’s drinking value, etc. (i.e., KRW 870,00 on November 20, 2015 + KRW 1420,000 on December 21, 2015 + KRW 198,00 on January 7, 2016).

2) Determination

Comprehensively taking account of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, the following facts and circumstances in this part of the facts charged are acknowledged as follows: (a) the Defendant, as stated in the list of offenses Nos. 13, 21, and 24 attached to R, received a total of KRW 3,680,000 (=total amount on the books) (i.e., the total amount on the books) (=8,50,000 won on November 20, 2015 + KRW 1,330,000 + KRW 1,50,000 on December 7, 2015) as stated in the judgment, but it is difficult to view that the evidence submitted by the public prosecutor alone proves that the Defendant was provided with entertainment exceeding the above amount, i.e., the remaining facts charged, to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt to acknowledge otherwise.

A) As to the process of preparing the instant book, under this law, KR stated the text from time to time on which the competent son entered the order of drinking, food, etc., but it stated that only the total amount of payment by table table was directly recorded after confirming the order content or made the employee enter the amount of AR in the amount of payment (as the AR record No. 3, 12 pages), and in AT also prosecutorial investigation there was a certain amount of discretion as to the calculation of the total amount of payment, the employees were always asked AR to pay the total amount of payment by table, and AR stated that she would not inform AR of the total amount of payment or cause a service to be added (in light of the investigation record No. 401, 402 pages). In addition, in view of this, it appears that AR’s final payment of the order content of this case, which is the restaurant business of this case, was either confirmed or confirmed after providing AR service.

B) On the other hand, in the case of each date and time stated in this part of the facts charged, the total amount on the account books (total settlement amount, hereinafter referred to as "total amount on the account books") is less than the total amount calculated on the basis of the orders stated in the instant book as shown in the table below (the investigation record 1103, 1111, 1114 pages), and there is a possibility that AR may grant a discount to some of the total amount on the basis of the alcohol and alcos stated in the order details of the instant book.

A person shall be appointed.

(c)AR and AT made a statement that "as the total amount of credit on the account books for the Defendant exceeds KRW 10 million, the amount of credit on the account books for the Defendant would have been settled by contact with R's execution secretary and by means of a corporate card (as the investigation record 4009 pages). Since R made a final settlement on the basis of total amount on the account books and claimed credit on R, it is unlikely that R would have paid the amount of credit on the account books exceeding the total amount on the account books.

D) Therefore, it is reasonable to calculate the amount of the accepted acceptance based on the “total amount on the account books” if the “total amount on the account books” is less than the “total amount on the account books” calculated based on the text records stated in the instant book as stated in this part of the facts charged

D. Sub-committee

The facts charged in this part of the charges must be pronounced not guilty by the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act because they constitute a case where there is no proof of a crime, but a bribe in relation to such a single crime.

As long as the crime of giving and receiving is found guilty, the judgment of innocence shall not be pronounced separately.

2. The fact that part of R-related violation of the Political Funds Act (the receipt of gift certificates in attached Form 64, 78, 108 through 113, 124 through 134, 136, 137, 142 through 178).

A. Summary of the facts charged

The Defendant received political funds worth KRW 5,80,000,000 from R from August 16, 2012 to April 7, 2013 in the amount equivalent to KRW 5,80,000,000, total of KRW 58,000,00 for the New World and Hyundai Department Store gift certificates purchased from R to the funds of U and AA corporation, as indicated in the list of offenses (2) in attached Form No. 1 (2) from R to April 7, 2013.

B. Determination

In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, the sole evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the defendant constitutes a "person engaged in political activities" as provided for in the Political Funds Act during the period (from August 16, 2012 to April 7, 2013) expelled from the Jparty, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

1) In order for the Defendant to be a person who engages in political activities, there must be the activities of the Defendant directly related to the political party, election for public office, and supporters’ association. As the resolution of expulsion of a political party became final, the Defendant was unable to act as a party member in the J political party, and the Defendant did not seem to have engaged in other political parties during the above period. Moreover, there is no evidence as to the fact that the Defendant was a specific plan to participate in a specific election for public office, such as the 20th National Assembly election during the above period, or that there was a direct relation with the specific supporters’ association. Therefore, the Defendant was in a position not to be considered as a “person engaged in political activities, such as a party, election for public office, or supporters’ association, who mainly engages in

2) According to the newspaper articles (Evidence Nos. 114) submitted by the prosecutor as evidence, for the above period, the following media reports were made to the defendant, and there was no reported material about the defendant's specific activities.

○○ On December 23, 2012, Q: (a) the possibility of the Defendant’s “Cheongdae” after being elected to the President on December 23, 2012 is changed. ○○ on December 24, 2012: the Defendant appears to be able to be in charge of acquisition or a certain period in L Government centered on the government and labor sector. ○○○ CR on February 7, 2013: The J Party discussed the agenda for the Defendant at the highest committee on January 2013, but suspended its resolution.

3) From January 2013 to April 2013, the Defendant was a member of the J Party, a member of the political division, or a group of golf meetings. Since there is room to view that the Defendant, who served as a member of the J Party, has a private group with his branch, there is room to regard that the Defendant was mainly engaged in activities related to a political party, an election for public office, or a supporters’ association. Furthermore, even if such activities are considered as de facto political activities for the Defendant’s rehabilitation, it would be difficult to deem that the Defendant mainly engaged in activities related to a political party, an election for public office, or a supporters’ association. Even if such activities are considered as de facto political activities for the Defendant’s rehabilitation, setting the Defendant as a person engaged in political activities, and applying the Political Funds Act to punish the Defendant’s social activities by applying the Political Funds Act would go beyond

C. Sub-committee

This part of the facts charged should be pronounced not guilty under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act because it constitutes a case where there is no proof of a crime. However, the decision 2 in relation to this comprehensive crime

A. 1) As long as the Defendant is found guilty of violating the Political Funds Act as stated in paragraph (1), the Defendant shall not be acquitted in the text separately.

3. The fact that part of AI-related political funds are violated;

A. Summary of the facts charged

From July 10, 2015 to September 25, 2015, the Defendant received 14,456,162 won in total, and 2,162,405 won in total, including the Plaintiff’s employee’s pay, etc. to AO, an executing engineer, from the AI, from the AI to the ASEAN located in the name of AJ. Meanwhile, the Defendant received 1,02,70 won in total by being provided with one physical card linked to the Industrial Bank of Korea account of the AJ, and paid 1,02,70 won in total with the said card for the same period. However, the Defendant received a contribution of political funds equivalent to 17,641,2679 won in total by means not stipulated in the Political Funds Act.

B. Determination

As seen earlier, the Defendant served as the Secretary General of the Presidential Secretariat from July 10, 2015, and was in charge of political affairs, such as political advice to the President, political party relationship, and relationship with the National Assembly. The Defendant is merely a person who assists the President as a Q2 public official, and there is no evidence to deem that the Defendant is a party, an election for public office, or a supporters’ association. The evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize the Defendant as a “person who engages in political activities” under the Political Funds Act during the period in which the Defendant was in office as the Secretary General of the Presidential Secretariat (on July 10, 2015,- September 25, 2015), and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise (the Prosecutor is a “person who engages in political activities as a public official in political service,” but whether the Defendant constitutes a “person who engages in political activities” under the Political Funds Act, as before examining whether it falls under the “person who is a political activity” as a political party, a supporters in public office, or a person directly related with a supporters’ political activities.

This part of the facts charged shall be pronounced not guilty under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act because it constitutes a case where there is no proof of a crime, but as long as the court found the defendant guilty of violating the Political Funds Act as stated in Article 2. b. of the judgment related to the comprehensive crime

4. The point of violation of the Political Funds Act relating to the F.

A. Facts charged

From June 29, 2016 to November 22, 2016, the Defendant received from F the sum of KRW 9,480,00,00,00,00, such as the lease fees for automobiles located in the CNesi, Qu90, March 8, 200, vehicle insurance premiums, KRW 2,128,060, and KRW 8,400,000,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won, in the same period, and received 1,125,000,000,000 in connection with the account for the same period, and received 31,258,060,060,00

B. Determination

In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, the evidence alone, which was presented by the prosecutor, is insufficient to acknowledge this part of the facts charged on the premise that the Defendant constitutes a “person engaged in political activities” as provided in the Political Funds Act during the period from June 29, 2016 to November 22, 2016, which was after the Defendant retired from the office of P secretary of the Presidential Secretariat, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

1) In order for the Defendant to be a person engaged in political activities, the Defendant’s activities related to the political party, election for public office, and supporters’ association must be carried out. There is no evidence that the Defendant, after his retirement of the presidential secretary of the P secretary of the Presidential Secretariat, has practically carried out the activities, and there is no circumstance that the Defendant expressed his intention to participate in a specific election for public office, such as the election of the 21st National Assembly

2) According to the newspaper articles (Evidence Nos. 114) submitted by the prosecutor as evidence, there was a report on the defendant's future reports including articles that "for the above period, it is highly likely that the defendant will be appointed as CV", and there was no report on the details of the defendant's specific activities.

3) Although the Defendant had partially contacted with the National Assembly members belonging to the J Party and the President secretary of the Office of Secretary-General after the Defendant retired from the office of P secretary of the Presidential Secretariat, the possibility of personal contact with the Defendant cannot be ruled out. Therefore, it is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant was engaged in political activities related to a political party or election.

4) According to the F’s legal statement, the fact that the Defendant asked F to the effect that he would participate in the lectures held by the forum on August 2016, 2016, or that he would pay support payments to F in the Opos (hereinafter a witness F. 7 pages). However, it appears that the Defendant who served as a member of N District National Assembly appears to have served as an advisory member of the Opos, and there is insufficient materials to deem that the forum served as an advisory member of the Npos, and for the above period, there is insufficient reason to deem that the Defendant was engaged in a political activity directly related to a political party, election of public office, or supporters’ association. Thus, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant was engaged in a political activity directly related to a political party, election of public officials, or supporters’ association. Even if it is assessed that such activity was actually exercising political influence, the punishment of the Defendant by deeming the Defendant as a person engaged in political activity under the Political Funds Act by virtue of the concept that it could not be objective, can not be allowed.

This part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, it is not guilty by the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Judges and judges of the presiding judge;

Judges Park Jong-jin

Judges Lee Jin

1) To the extent that the defendant does not actually infringe the defendant's right of defense, it is consistent with the facts acknowledged without the amendment of indictment

The criminal facts were partly revised.

(ii) 1489, 1490 pages of investigation records;

3) KRW 60,255,874 [= KRW 16,822,480 for year 2013 + KRW 28,069,670 for year 2014 + KRW 15,363,724 for year 2015 (=)

17,466,129 Won x 190 days/216 days, forest below originals) , investigation records 1491-1499 pages

4) Investigation records 1500 to 1519

5) The amount settled on the day and the amount of credit on the day by the "total amount of the account books" in the attached list of crimes (2).

include.

6) AR et al. indicated the Defendant in the instant book as “BL,” “BL,” and “B,” and the Defendant was present at the time of reservation.

If the number of people is known, the number of people except the defendant was stated on the side of the "mark of the accused".

7) As seen in Section 1. A, the part of the lower judgment was reflected in calculating the amount of the accepted bribery.

8) R is not memoryed at the time when the above words were given to the Defendant, but the Defendant’s land damage.

To become a member of the Committee and to file an application with V to permit residential facilities for U projects;

The review was made at the stage of the review (4790-4793 pages of investigation records), and V on June 5, 2008, the housing construction was made.

After the amendment of the regulations on standards, etc., the issue of the introduction of residential facilities shall be examined and applied for the alteration of urban planning on July 2009 and 6.

In light of the investigation records(4793 pages), R refers to the problem of the upper price ceiling system to the defendant around 2008, 2009.

It seems that it appears that it is.

9) Defendant on charges of KRW 17,641,267 (= KRW 14,456,162 + KRW 2,162,405 + KRW 1,022,700 + Defendant on charges of KRW 173,166,781.

recognized 155,525,514 won after deduction)