Of the judgment of the court below against Defendant B and C, each part of the crime of occupational breach of trust against the victim K.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of Defendant A’s appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court was justifiable to have convicted Defendant A of all the charges of this case (excluding the part not guilty of the grounds for appeal) on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, the lower court did not err by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the status of custodian in the crime of embezzlement

2. Regarding the prosecutor's grounds for appeal

A. As to the delivery of a third party bribe to Defendant B and C, and the offering of a bribe, the bribery is the legal interest to protect the fair performance of official duties of the public official, the trust in society, and the purchase of the non-performance of official duties. Since the bribery does not require any solicitation or unlawful act, there is no special solicitation to recognize the acceptance of the bribe of the received money or goods. Moreover, it is sufficient that money or goods have been received in relation to the performance of official duties and there is no need for a quid pro quo relationship with each other (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Do3579, Oct. 12, 2001, etc.). Whether the profit gained by the public official constitutes an unjust profit related to the performance of official duties, the issue of whether there is a special private-friendly relationship between the public official and the provider of the benefits, and whether there is a different private-friendly relationship between the parties, the process and timing of receiving the benefits, etc. It is doubtful that the bribery constitutes a public official’s offering of legal interests from the public official’s purchase of official.