beta
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2, Article 7 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes ("Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes"), the legislative intent of Article 7 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes is to ensure the non-purchase of duties by prohibiting the act of receiving money by participating in the duties and receiving money in addition to the fact that the business of financial institutions under Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the same Act has a public nature and has a significant influence on the national
Here, “mediation” refers to “an act of mediating or assisting a certain matter between a certain person and his/her counterpart as to a certain matter.” As such, not only a case where a certain person transfers the intent of solicitation to the other party as it is, but also an act of making a solicitation on behalf of the other party constitutes “an act of making a solicitation to the other party on behalf of him/her.” This includes cases where the act
If money or other valuables are received under the pretext of such good offices, the above crime is established regardless of which good offices are actually conducted. On the other hand, whether there is a quid pro quo relationship between a good office and a good office and a good office of an employee of a financial institution shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances such as the contents of the good offices in question, the relationship between a broker and a benefit provider, the degree of profit, the details and timing of the receipt of profit, etc.
In addition, in case where the nature of the consideration for the good offices and the nature of the consideration for the other acts are indivisiblely combined with the money received by the good offices, it is reasonable to deem that the whole of the money received by the good offices have the nature of the consideration
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do8117, Jan. 31, 2008).