The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months and by a fine of five thousand won.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) Defendant 1 did not receive money as stated in the facts charged, and even if the Defendant received money as stated in the facts charged, this is merely a mere receipt by C, and thus, does not constitute a crime of acceptance of bribe. Nevertheless, the lower court which found Defendant guilty of all the facts charged in the instant case erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) Even if the Defendant was found guilty of unfair sentencing, the lower court’s punishment (two years of suspension of execution in six months of imprisonment and a fine of KRW 6.5 million) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the Defendant and the prosecutor prior to the judgment on the respective grounds for appeal.

Where both punishment of imprisonment and a fine are concurrently imposed on a daily crime, they shall not be mitigated only by either party, except as otherwise provided for in special circumstances, and both parties shall be mitigated.

(2) The court below held that the Defendant’s charge of this case was a single crime in the context of the application of the law. Nevertheless, the court below held that the Defendant was punished by imprisonment with prison labor and a fine, while imposing a fine on the Defendant, the Defendant was sentenced to punishment by discretionary mitigation, and sentenced to punishment. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on discretionary mitigation, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, thereby making it impossible to maintain the judgment.

However, even if there is a reason to reverse ex officio as above, the defendant's argument about mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, so it will be judged.

B. 1) Determination of the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts is found in the search and seizure of an investigative agency on the grounds of the circumstances as stated in its holding.