The judgment below

Defendant D and B’s convictions, Defendant A’s convictions, and Defendant A’s acquittals, which were September 2, 2014 and September 2, 2015.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor (Article 2(2) of the part not guilty of the original trial) by Defendant A and B, Defendant A and B, who conspired to hold a sale deliberation committee without consultation with the Ministry of National Defense, which is the managing authority of the State-owned land included in the instant housing construction project, and received a bribe of KRW 20 million from Defendant C and D on January 5, 2015 in return for such unlawful act.

Nevertheless, the lower court did not recognize the conspiracy relation to the above crime between Defendant A and B and such unlawful act in the above duties.

B) Inasmuch as the fact that Defendant C and D offered a bribe amounting to KRW 20 million in relation to the official duties of the public official is found guilty, such as the fact that the offering of a bribe was made on January 5, 2015 (Article 3(a) of the lower court’s judgment), Defendant C and D should also be found guilty of the offering of a bribe amounting to KRW 20 million.

Nevertheless, the lower court recognized the crime of offering of a bribe to Defendant C and D only for the amount of five million won that Defendant A delivered to the upper party B, and recognized the crime of offering a third-party bribe to Defendant A for the remainder of 15 million won.

C) Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor on September 2, 2014 and January 14, 2015, Defendant A’s violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Article 1 of the part not guilty of original trial) against Defendant A, Defendant A, who received 5 million won from AK on September 2, 2014, and Defendant E Co., Ltd (hereinafter “E”) on January 14, 2015.

5 million won received from Defendant A formally, under the name of advertising expenses for AP working for Defendant A, or in substance, it is convenient for Defendant A to undertake the instant housing construction project.