The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The misapprehension of the legal principle G stated in the prosecutorial office that there is no money or valuables in the delivery of money or valuables to the defendant except for the merchandise coupon for the Macopy store. The prosecutorial office did not submit the above G's statement which is clear evidence proving the defendant's innocence. Since the indictment of this case loses procedural legitimacy, the prosecutorial office should be dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act, but the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. Thus, the judgment of the court below is erroneous

B. In light of the fact that the Defendant received KRW 3 million from K on September 7, 2005, and completed the excavation and investigation of cultural heritage, there was a gift certificate of KRW 2 million from G on January 2006, 2006, and there was no illegal solicitation in relation to the excavation and investigation of cultural heritage. However, there was no fact that there was no illegal solicitation in relation to the excavation and investigation of cultural heritage, and the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case, and there was no fact that there was no money or other illegal solicitation in relation to the excavation and investigation of cultural heritage from FF Co., Ltd. except for the money or other valuables received twice.

C. Even if the defendant received an unjust solicitation, it is not an illegal act corresponding thereto, and in light of the public services he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he he stored in to protect and excavate cultural properties (two years of suspended sentence in August).

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of ex officio appeal, the prosecutor examined ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal, and the prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment of this case as stated in the following facts constituting a crime. Since this court permitted this, the subject of the judgment was changed, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

(b).