Whether a bribe received through several times is deemed as a blanket crime and can be deemed as a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes.

The defendant's receipt of a bribe of KRW 2,778,00 from the same person over 16 times between January 26, 1970 and March 12 of the same year can be deemed as a single comprehensive crime. Thus, Article 2 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Article 129 (1) of the Criminal Act are applicable.

Article 2(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc., Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 37 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

(National)An Attorney Park Chang-soo;

Seoul High Court Decision 72No555 delivered on August 31, 1973

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal No. 2 by the defense counsel and the defendant are examined.

According to the records, the court below's reasonable collection of 111,130,420 won in the execution amount of this case is 76,960 won in the amount of bribe received. Among the defendant's 2,778,000 won in the amount of bribe received by the defendant as recognized by the court below, it is clear that most of the above 2,778,00 won in the amount of the above 2,778,00 won in the amount of the above 2,778,00 won are the office fee, and there is no ground for appeal that the court below erred by mistake of facts due to

The first ground for appeal by the defense counsel is examined.

The defendant's acceptance of a bribe of 2,778,00 won in total from co-defendant 16 times between January 26, 1970 and March 12 of the same year can be deemed as a comprehensive crime. Thus, the court below's determination that this constitutes Article 2 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Article 129 (1) of the Criminal Act is justified and it cannot be said that there was an error in the application of the law.

In the above case, the judgment of the court below is not acceptable under the view that it does not constitute the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Yang Byung-ho (Presiding Justice)