A. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery)

B. Acceptance of bribe

(c) Offering of bribe;

1. A. B. Na. ○○

2. (c) Domination ○

nan

Law Firm

Law Firm

July 22, 2008

Defendant Song-○ shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months, and by a fine of KRW 1,00,000, and KRW 000.

The period of 50,000 won converted into one day when Defendant Park ○ does not pay the above fine

The defendant shall be confined in a workhouse.

With respect to Defendant ○○, 124 days of detention prior to the pronouncement of this judgment shall be included in the above sentence.

However, with respect to the defendant ○○, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

A penalty of KRW 9, 167, and 200 shall be additionally collected from Defendant Song○○.

To order the defendant Park ○-○ to pay an amount of money equivalent to the above fine.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes against Defendant Song○○

On the other hand, the offering of a bribe at around December 2004 and around January 2005 to around February 2005, and around February 2, 2005.

each of them is not guilty.

Criminal facts

1. Defendant transmitted ○○

On October 13, 1984, the Defendant was appointed as a public official in civil engineering and technical service at the ○○○○○○○○○○○ Construction Bureau from September 1992 to July 22, 1993; the head of the housing planning and mooring division at the ○○○○○ Housing Construction Bureau from July 23, 1993 to February 27, 1996; the head of the ○○○○○○ Viewing Road from February 28, 1996 to March 26, 2002; the head of the ○○○ Urban Construction Bureau from around January 1, 2004 to around July 22, 1993; the head of the ○○ Urban Construction Bureau from around February 23, 1993 to around February 28, 199; the head of the ○○ Urban Construction Bureau in charge of overall construction and construction planning; the head of the ○○ Urban Construction Bureau in charge of overall construction and construction planning.

On February 2, 2007, the Defendant’s main business activities consisting of design, supervision, and construction of government-funded construction works and various kinds of construction works in the area of O, including package deal doctors, at around 007, at a 00-dong III, and in addition, the case where ○○○ and ○○○, the actual operator of the company’s ○○○ and ○○○, the actual operator of the company providing technical services for the urban development project in the East Gun area, etc., which is the director of the urban planning station at the time, provided the above ○○ and ○○○, the orders for government-funded construction and services of ○○ and ○○○, Inc., Ltd., and continued to provide support in the future, and the Defendant’s family members paid KRW 1,00,000 in cash, which was provided as the expenses for the Jeju-do family travel of the Defendant and his family members. In addition, ○ paid KRW 1,067,200.

Accordingly, the Defendant received financial benefits equivalent to KRW 2,067, 200 in total from around February 2, 2007, including the receipt of a bribe in connection with his duties from around October 2005 to September 2007 by a public official, who received financial benefits equivalent to KRW 2,067,20,00 in total from around around September 200, to around September 2007, including the receipt of the bribe in connection with his duties, and provided the public official with financial benefits equivalent to KRW 9,167 in total from around October 205 to around September 200 through around 11, 207, such as the entry of the list of crimes in the attached Form. ○○, Defendant Park Jong-ok, a representative director of ○○ Construction at the time of urban development project, who is the representative director of ○○○○, a corporation that had been engaged in the construction of ○○ Sewage Sewage Treatment Facility at the time, with the request of the public official for convenience in the performance of his duties, etc.

The bribe was received.

2. Defendant’s gambling ○

The defendant is the representative director of the construction company ○○, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as the "○○") located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

The Defendant’s urban development from January 13, 2007 to 14, at the time of Ora Golf Course, etc. located in Jeju-do.

○○ Construction Co., Ltd. which was promoting the strengthening cultural complex project together with the Defendant

In addition to the letter of request that the above business can be promoted well to the defendant Song-○, the representative director Kim ○, together with the letter of request that the above business can be promoted well, he provided entertainment such as 320,000 won per person, such as a leading trip and golf fold.

Accordingly, in collusion with Kim○-○, the Defendant offered a bribe by providing Defendant Song-○○ with pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 320,000 in connection with his duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. The defendants' statements are written in part of each interrogation protocol of the prosecution against the defendants.

1. The second written statement made by the prosecution against the defendant ○○ by the defendant, and the seizure and search attached thereto;

Responses to a verification warrant, requests for investigation cooperation, replys to request for investigation cooperation, replys according to requests for investigation cooperation.

(2157 to 2169 pages)

1. The first and the third (1962 pages 1962 of the investigation records) prosecutor's protocol against the defendant Park ○-○

Note :

1. Each prosecutor’s protocol on ○○, ○○, ○○, Ma○, Ma○, Ma○○, Ma○○, Han-○, and Han-○ (high ○○○)

Part of alcoholic beverages, including parts of alcoholic beverages

1. Copy of the second protocol of interrogation of suspect to the prosecution about ○○○; and

1. A copy of each prosecutor's statement concerning ○○○, ○○, and Gab○○;

1. Status of entry or departure of each individual (291 to 309 pages of investigation records);

1. Each investigation report (a certified copy of corporate register ○○○ in attached note) or each investigation report (a note);

A confirmation of trip sent by ○○ Office (including each description) and a telephone with ○○○ employee.

monetary reporting, re-preparation of entry or departure records (the schedule, 00 office attached to the preparation of entry or departure records);

Overseas golf of related public officials, such as the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, and the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, and the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism.

(A) Confirmation of whether approval has been granted at the time of projected, (a note attached to the Overseas Tour List, (a note) 00 head of the Tong and next 00 head of the Tong.

A report on confirmation of the status of the use of a domestic vessel (including this entry), the use of a domestic vessel attached thereto

2) A report on the attachment of data related to ○○ Construction (including a statement on the establishment, operation, etc. of a reinforced cultural complex attached thereto)

(n) the basic agreement (n), the basic agreement on the construction and operation of the strengthened Leisure Complex (n) and the contractor (owner) 0

○ Construction, the contractor (main contractor)’s duties related to the engineering standard contract and the urban planning authority’s duties

Each description of data shall be included)

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and the selection of punishment for the crime;

A. Defendant Song-○: Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act (Selection of Imprisonment)

B. Defendant Park ○-○: Articles 133(1) and 129(1) of the Criminal Act (Selection of a fine)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Defendant Song-○: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (the heavier penalty for a crime committed on February 2, 2007)

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Defendant Park ○: Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Inclusion of days of pre-trial detention;

Defendant Song-○: Article 57 of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution;

Defendant ○○: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da4288, Apr.

1. Additional collection:

Defendant ○○: Article 6 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Confiscation of Public Officials’ Crimes

1. Order of provisional payment;

Defendant Park ○: Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Judgment on the defendants' and defense counsel's arguments

1. Summary of the assertion

The golf trips Nos. 9 and 10 of the annexed Table 10 asserts that they do not accept a bribe in relation to their duties, because they were engaged in a campaign in a personal-friendly relationship.

2. Determination

Whether a public official’s profit constitutes a bribe as an unjust profit in relation to his duties shall be determined by taking into account all the circumstances, such as the contents of the public official’s duties, the relationship between the provider of the duties and the benefit, whether there exists a special relationship between the parties, the degree of interest and the circumstances and timing of receiving the benefit, etc. In light of the fact that the bribery is the legal interest protected by the law of the process of performing his duties and the trust of the society, whether the public official reduced the benefit to receive it and thereby becomes an important standard for determining whether the fairness of performing his duties is doubtful from the general public, and the bribery is a process of performing his duties and its related legal interest.

It is not necessary to make a special solicitation to recognize the bribe of money and valuables received since the trust in society and the non-scam ○○ is protected by the law, and it does not require any solicitation or unjust act concerning the duties, and there is no need to specify the duty act (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do4204, Apr. 27, 2007, etc.).

Therefore, as indicated in [Attachment 9] ○○○○○○○○○ Construction Co., Ltd., Ltd., and ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ Construction Co., Ltd., Ltd., on the following grounds: (a) Defendant 1 was working as the Director of the Urban Planning Bureau of ○○○○○○○○○○ Construction Co., Ltd.; (b) was working in a position to exercise considerable influence on public officials in charge of various construction works ordered at this ○○○○○○○ Construction Co., Ltd., Ltd.; and (c) was working in the first public prosecutor’s office for the purpose of “○○○○○ Construction Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., ○○○○○○○○○○○ Construction Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., which, on the basis of the foregoing facts; and (d) was working in the first public prosecutor’s name of ○○○○ Construction Co., Ltd., Ltd.; and (c) was tryed to do so.

Therefore, the defendants and defense counsel's above assertion is without merit.

The acquittal portion

1. Summary of the facts charged

A. Defendant Song ○

(1) From January 2004 to August 2005, the Defendant, working as the director of the Construction and Disaster Prevention Bureau of ○○ City (the name of the director of the Construction Planning Bureau from February 2, 2005) (the name of the director of the Construction and Planning Bureau of the Urban Balanced Construction Bureau), was placed in a place where the Defendant, who is his wife, would have to pay off money with large loans of KRW 1 billion to KRW 1.2 billion and KRW 1.2 billion, which came to his wife while carrying out insurance activities. As the Defendant, he requested the operators of construction and civil engineering-related enterprises, etc. known to his usual duties, etc. to use money for performing his obligations such as 1.0 billion and paid off money to ○○○○○○○ (the name of the director of the Construction and Planning Division of the Construction and Planning Bureau of the Urban Balanced Construction Bureau). Accordingly, on March 26, 2004, she requested ○○○ (the president of the Construction & Civil Corporation) to specialize in designing and construction supervision services on roads, structures.

The case where the defendant assisted the above ○○○○-related government-funded construction orders, etc. in the future, and the order for the design and performance of supervision services of various construction works ordered at ○○○-si in the future is given to ○○, which is a student, for the purpose of obtaining convenience from the defendant in the design and performance process of supervision services, etc., and “it is necessary to pay money” to ○○, a student, who is a student, for the purpose of obtaining convenience from the defendant. There was a lot of help from ○○○-related public-private partnership, etc. Even in the past, the case was about the case where ○○-related public-private partnership works, etc., but the body did not come up with the case, and thus, it would be helpful to give a design station, etc. related to various government-private partnership works, etc. in the future, which is sent to ○○-related third party in the name of a third party who is not related to the company.”

On the same day, the Defendant received delivery of KRW 50,000,000,000,000, which was transferred to the ○○○○○○○, which was given instructions by the O○○○, in the name of the O○○.

As a result, the Defendant received money and valuables from ○○○ and Do○○○ and received 50 million won from a public official in relation to his duties.

(2) As mentioned in the above (1), the Defendant demanded the operators of construction and civil engineering-related enterprises, etc. to provide money and valuables to use it to repay debts, such as Lb○’s bonds, etc., and demanded on December 2, 2004, Defendant Park Jong-○, the representative director of ○○○○, who mainly performs government-funded construction in the area of ○○○○○, to offer money to repay the debt of ○○○○.

The Defendant, at around that time, who received the above demand from the Defendant in Lestop in the name of ○○○, was able to receive a conference containing ○○ or ○○ in various construction works and package deal projects (one name stop stop stop s topies) ordered by ○○○○.

The certificate of KRW 100,000,000, which was issued to 100,000 won in total.

After that, the Defendant’s offer to the same effect from January to February 2, 2005 with the same purport in Lestop.

of KRW 50,000,000 issued KRW 50,000 in total.

As a result, the Defendant received a total of KRW 150 million from the Defendant Park ○○○, and the public official received money and valuables in connection with his duties.

B. Defendant Gab○○

On December 2, 2004, the Defendant was demanded from the Defendant Song-○ to offer money to repay his debt to Park Il-○.

Accordingly, the Defendant issued 100,000 won total of 100,000 won check to Defendant Song-○, to the effect that, around that time, the Defendant attempted to receive consensus including ○○ or ○○○ in various construction works and package deal projects (one-person, one), etc. ordered by ○○○ City from the mutual influencescences in the name of ○○○○ City.

After that, the Defendant delivered KRW 50,000,000 to the Defendant Song-○, for the same purpose, from January to February of 2005, to the same effect in the said Lestop, KRW 50,000,000 in total.

Accordingly, the Defendant, who is a public official, provided a total of KRW 150 million in connection with his duties to the Defendant ○○○, who is a public official.

2. Summary of the assertion

A. Defendant ○○ and his defense counsel

Defendant Song-○ consistently and consistently from the prosecutor’s office to this court, asserts that the above amount was 50 million won, or KRW 150 million, or KRW 50 million, or KRW 50 million, or KRW 50 million, or KRW 1550,000,000, or KRW 5000,000,000 as stated in each of the above facts charged, but all of the above amounts were borrowed from Kang-○ or Defendant Park Jong-○.

B. Defendant Park○-○ and his defense counsel

Defendant Park ○ also consistently from the prosecution to this court, and there was a fact that Defendant Song-○ delivered KRW 100 million and KRW 50 million and KRW 150 million to Defendant Song-○ around the time limit stated in the above facts charged, but the above amount is the amount loaned to Defendant Song-○.

3. Determination

(a) the criteria for determining and the burden of proof;

In the case of accepting a bribe, the question of whether or not the consignee actually borrows the money when the consignee accepts the money from the accepter rather than receiving the money from the accepter shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the objective circumstances revealed by evidence, such as motive, reason for delivery, and method of payment of the money from the accepter, relationship between the accepter and the accepter, both duties and occupation, necessity of borrowing the bribe, possibility of borrowing from the person other than the accepter, amount of borrowing and treatment of the borrowed money, the economic situation of the accepter and the amount of the borrowed money, whether collateral is provided, payment period and interest agreement related to the accepter, whether or not the accepter pays the money from the accepter, demand of the accepter in default, possibility of compulsory execution, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 200Da1348, Apr. 1, 2008).

See Supreme Court Decision 2007Do3943 Decided September 7, 2007, etc.

In addition, the burden of proving the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial is the prosecutor, and the recognition of the crime of guilt is based on the evidence with probative value, which leads to the judge to have a serious doubt that the facts charged are true enough to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is no doubt as to the defendant's guilt, it should be determined with the benefit of the defendant (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do735, Apr. 27, 2006, etc.).

Therefore, as long as there exists a reasonable doubt that the above amount received by Defendant ○○ is not a loan but a bribe, as long as there exists a prosecutor with the burden of proof on the fact that it is a bribe, it shall not be said that the above amount is a bribe.

B. The part related to ○○○-related KRW 50 million

First of all, we examine whether the defendant's Song-○ constitutes a bribe in the amount of KRW 50,000,000, which was remitted by the defendant's Song-○ and Gangwon-○.

It seems that the above 5.0 million won is directly proved to be a bribe or a part of the testimony to the prosecutor's office and investigation agency. In the statement (1642 pages of investigation record) and the first prosecutor's protocol of statement, ○○○ is a strong ○○○○○’s strong call from the person who was in need of the insurance company, and 5.0 million won will be lent to the person who was well aware of within 0,000 won, so that ○○ may not receive money from 00,000 won in the future, and that ○○○ would have lent money from 00,000 won to ○○○○○, which was actually lent to 0,000 won, and that ○○○ was a public official who was in charge of the investigation and delivery of money from 0,000 won to ○○○○, which would be more than 0,000 won, and that it would be more than 0,000 won to ○○.”

In light of the term “○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○,” which was actually demanding a bribe to be given to him, and that he would transfer money to the Director,” and “○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ was directly or indirectly assisted by ○○○○○○○○○○ at the time of giving orders from ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, which would have been a mere demand for a bribe to ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, and that it would have been difficult for ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, which would have been a mere demand for a bribe to be given to ○○○○○○○○○○, which would have been a mere fact that it would have been disadvantageous to ○○○○○○○○ in the process of its submission.

In addition, it is insufficient to determine the fact that the above 50,000 won was a bribe, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it differently, only with the other evidence duly adopted and examined, such as the witness lecture, ○○, ○○, ○○○, and other statements in other courts and investigative agencies, the suspect interrogation protocol of the prosecution against ○○○, ○○, the prosecutor’s protocol of the prosecution, and other statements in the prosecutor’s protocol on Park○-○.

오히려 피고인들과 증인 박○○의 각 법정진술 , 송○○ 명의의 신한은행 계좌의 거 래내역 , 최○○ 명의의 하나은행 계좌거래내역서의 각 기재 등에 의하여 인정되는 다 음과 같은 사정 , 즉 ① 피고인 송○○은 처인 박○○에게 사채 빚이 많다는 사실을 2003년경 처음 알게 되었고 , 이에 ○○ 남동구 에 있는 주택을 처분하여 2억 5 , 000만 원 상당을 채권자에게 넘겨주었으며 , 은행권에서 적금해약 및 대출금으로 1억 1 , 000 ~ 2 , 000만 원 , 부모님으로부터 1억 원을 보조받아 사채업자에게 갚으라면서 박 ○○에게 건네주어 모든 빚이 청산된 것으로 알고 있었는데 박○○로부터 빚이 추가로 조금 더 남아 있다는 말을 듣고 달리 금융기관으로부터 차용할 수 없는 형편이어서 강 ○○로부터 5 , 000만 원을 빌려 다시 박○○의 통장으로 이체하여 주었다고 진술하고 있고 , 박○○도 2004년 당시 카드빚 , 사채 , 금융권 채무 등 모든 채무를 합하면 10억 원이 넘었는데 , 그 이후 지금까지 남편과 시댁에서 6억 원 정도 , 박○○가 친정에서 3 억 원 정도를 구하여 채무를 갚았고 , 파산신청을 하여 채무 1억 원 상당이 면책되었으 며 , 현재 최소한 1 ~ 2억 원 정도가 남아있다고 진술하고 있는 것으로 보아 2004 . 3 . 경 당시 피고인 송○○ 및 박○○는 가정파탄에 이를 정도로 채무를 많이 부담하고 있어 다른 사람으로부터 금전을 차용하여야 할 필요성이 매우 컸던 것으로 보이는 점 , ② 피고인 송○○은 자신이 평소 급여 계좌로 사용하고 있던 통장으로 위 금원을 송금받 았고 , 송금 후 며칠 내로 위 금원 중 대부분이 박○○의 통장으로 이체되어 박○○가 위 금원을 사용한 것으로 보이는 점 , ③ 김○○이 진술서를 통하여 “ 송○○ 국장과 강 ○○가 1990년대 중반경부터 친분을 쌓게 되어 친구관계처럼 친하게 지냈다고 강○○ 로부터 수차례 들었고 , 2004 . 3 . 경 강○○가 갑자기 저에게 ' 송과장 큰일이야 , 부인을 잘못 만나서 고생이 이만저만이 아니야 . 공무원 20년 이상 근무했는데 그렇게 어렵고 , 못 산다니 … … ” 하면서 혀를 차는 모습이 기억이 납니다 . ” 라고 진술하는 등 당시 피고 인 송○○과 강○○가 평소에 친구처럼 친하게 지내고 있었고 강○○가 피고인 송○○ 의 어려운 사정을 잘 알고 있었던 것으로 보이는 점 , ④ 피고인 송○○은 강○○에게 위 금원을 차용하고 나서 일주일 정도 지나 ○○에서 강○○ , 전○○을 만나 변제일을 2009 . 12 . 31 . , 이율을 연 5 % 로 정하여 차용증을 작성해 주었고 , 변제일에 관하여 위와 같이 정한 것은 자신이 2009년 말까지 근무하고 퇴직할 결심을 하였기에 그 퇴직금으 로 변제하기 위함이었고 , 이율은 당시의 은행이율을 고려하여 5 % 로 정하게 된 것이라 고 진술하고 있고 , 피고인 송○○의 재직연수 및 급여수준에 비추어 2009년 말경 퇴직 하게 될 경우 그 예상 퇴직금 액수가 위 차용원리금을 갚기에 충분한 금원인 것으로 보여 피고인 송○○의 위 진술도 상당히 신빙성이 있어 보이는 점 ( 피고인 송○○은 검 찰 조사시 위 금원을 송금 받은 날 저녁에 강○○를 만나 차용증을 작성해 주었다고 진술하다가 이 법정에서는 송금 받은 후 일주일 정도 지나 차용증을 작성해 주었다고 진술하여 차용증 작성일에 관한 진술 내용이 바뀌었으나 , 4년 전의 기억을 되살려 진 술한 것일 뿐만 아니라 수사기관에서 특별히 강○○를 만나 차용증을 작성한 날짜가 중요하다는 전제하에 신문을 받은 것으로는 보이지 않는 점에 비추어 그러한 사정만으 로 피고인 송○○의 위 법정진술의 신빙성이 크게 영향을 받지는 않는다고 할 것이다 ) , ⑤ 송금을 지시한 장본인이자 피고인 송○○이 차용증을 교부한 상대방이라고 주장하 는 강○○가 오래 전에 사망한 상황에서 현재 차용증의 존재 여부가 확인되지 않고 있 다는 사정만으로 곧바로 차용증이 작성된 바가 없다거나 나아가 피고인 송○○이 위 5 , 000만 원을 뇌물로 수수한 것이라고는 단정할 수 없는 점 및 ⑥ 수수한 금액이 5 , 000만 원의 거액인 반면 그 무렵 대규모 공사를 수주하는 등 직접적으로 대가관계 있는 이익을 강○○가 받았다고 보기는 어려운 점 등을 종합하여 보면 , 피고인 송○○ 이 강○○로부터 받은 5 , 000만 원이 차용금일지도 모른다는 의심을 지우기 어렵다 .

C. 150 million won in relation to the Defendant’s gambling ○○

Next, we examine whether the defendant Song-○ constitutes a bribe of KRW 150,000,000,000 received two times from the defendant Park Jong-○.

Unlike the above KRW 50,000,000, Defendant Song○○ received from ○○○○, there was no direct evidence or evidence as to this part, which seems consistent with the facts charged. Each prosecutor’s statement about ○○○○○○○’s legal statement, Y○○○, Kim○, and west○○, each of the prosecutor’s business records in 2005, and each of the investigation reports (200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,00,00,00).

오히려 피고인들과 박○○의 각 법정 및 수사기관에서의 진술 , 차용증 및 그에 첨부 된 인감증명서 , 인감증명발급대장의 각 기재 등에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정 , 즉 ① 앞에서 본 바와 같이 피고인 송○○은 박○○가 가정파탄에 이를 정도로 많은 채무를 부담하고 있는 상태에서 2004 . 3 . 24 . 경 강○○로부터 5 , 000만 원을 차용하여 박○○의 채무변제에 사용하였음에도 여전히 박○○의 채무가 상당히 많이 남아 있었 고 달리 금융기관 등으로부터 돈을 더 빌릴 여력이 없어 가까운 지인으로부터 돈을 빌 려야 할 필요성이 있었던 것으로 보이는 점 , ② 피고인들은 1994년경 처음 알게 되었 고 , 이후 피고인 송○○이 ○○시 부평구 도시국장 , ○○ 경기장관리사무소장으로 근무 하는 동안 여러 차례 만나 친하게 지내왔으며 , 이후 가족동반 모임을 가지는 등 친형 제 이상으로 가깝게 지내왔던 점 , ③ 피고인들은 돈을 수수한 경위와 관련하여 , 2004 . 10 . 경 어느 날 저녁에 피고인 송○○로부터 전화가 와서 피고인 박○○이 식당으로 가 보았는데 피고인 송○○이 혼자 술을 많이 먹고 만취해 있어 피고인 박○○이 무슨 일 이냐고 물었더니 피고인 송○○은 박○○가 일을 잘못 하여 빚을 많이 져서 집을 팔아 서 빚을 갚아주었는데 박○○가 또 빚이 있다고 하니 속이 상한다는 말을 하였고 , 며 칠 후 다시 만났을 때 피고인 송○○은 박○○가 1억 원 가량의 빚이 있다고 하여 집 을 팔아서 해결한 것으로 알았는데 또 빚이 그만큼 더 있다고 하니 갚아줄 능력도 없 고 이혼을 해야겠다고 하여 , 피고인 박○○이 자녀들을 봐서라도 이혼을 신중하게 생 각하라고 하면서 자신이 일부라도 차용을 해 주겠다고 하였으며 , 피고인 박○○이 2004 . 11 . 경 피고인 송○○을 만나 1억 5 , 000만 원은 마련할 수 있다고 하니 피고인 송○○이 고맙다고 하였고 , 한 달 정도 지나 2004 . 12 . 8 . 경 저녁에 피고인 박○○이 피고인 송○○에게 돈이 준비되었다고 하여 그 다음 날 만나기로 했는데 , 약속일 아침 에 박○○로부터 전화가 와서 만났을 때 박○○가 급하다고 하면서 일부라도 자신에게 먼저 달라고 간청하여 3 , 000만 원을 먼저 주고 저녁에 피고인 송○○을 만나 오전에 박○○에게 3 , 000만 원을 주었다고 하면서 나머지 7 , 000만 원을 전달해 주었으며 , 피고 인 송○○은 그날 저녁 피고인 박○○이 1억 5 , 000만 원을 가지고 나오는 것으로 알고 1억 5 , 000만 원의 차용증을 만들어서 약속 장소에 갔더니 피고인 박○○이 1억 원만 건네주면서 수표번호를 기재해 달라고 하여 피고인 송○○이 차용증에 수표번호를 기 재하였고 , 피고인 박○○이 나머지 5 , 000만 원을 가지고 나오지 않아 차용증은 피고인 송○○이 가지고 있기로 하되 대신 1억 원에 대한 영수증만 따로 작성하였으며 , 약 한 달 정도 후에 피고인 박○○이 5 , 000만 원을 마련하여 피고인 송○○에게 건네 주게 되었을 때 ' 변제일 : 2009 . 12 . 31 . , 이율 : 년 5 % 라고 추가로 기재한 다음 그 차용증 을 받고 이전에 받아둔 1억 원의 영수증을 돌려주었다고 진술하고 있는데 , 이처럼 2회 에 걸쳐 돈을 건네받은 경위에 대한 피고인들의 진술은 일관되고 구체적이어서 상당히 신빙성이 있어 보이는 점 ( 피고인들은 검찰 조사시 계속하여 2004 . 12 . 9 . 저녁에 피고 인 박○○이 피고인 송○○을 만나 100만 원권 수표 100장을 전해 주었다고 진술하다 . 가 이 법정에서는 위와 같이 같은 날 아침에 피고인 박○○이 박○○를 만나 3 , 000만 원을 먼저 주고 이어 저녁에 피고인 송○○을 만나 나머지 7 , 000만 원을 주었다고 진 술하여 진술내용이 일부 바뀌었으나 , 사실은 박○○까지 이 사건에 연루될 것을 우려 하여 피고인 송○○이 피고인 박○○에게 박○○가 먼저 받아간 부분을 수사기관에서 진술하지 않도록 해 달라고 부탁하여 박○○가 3 , 000만 원 상당을 먼저 받아간 사실은 피고인들이 진술하지 않고 금품수수경위를 간략히 답변하였다고 하는데 , 뇌물인지 차 용금인지 여부가 쟁점이 되어 조사받는 상황에서 , 박○○가 아침에 3 , 000만 원을 먼저 받았는지 여부까지 굳이 먼저 밝히지 않았다는 사정만으로 전체적인 흐름에 있어서 피 고인들의 위 진술내용이 일관성이 없다거나 그 신빙성이 떨어진다고는 볼 수 없다 ) , ④ 2004 . 12 . 9 . 자 인감증명서가 첨부되어 있고 변제일과 이율이 기재되어 있는 차용증이 실제 존재한다는 점 ( 검사는 피고인들이 검찰 조사가 시작된 이후 허위로 위 차용증을 작성하였을지 모른다는 의혹을 제기하나 , 변제일과 이율을 기재한 부분의 필기도구와 수표번호를 기재한 필기도구가 상이하고 , 차용증에 날인하기 위하여 사용된 피고인 송 ○○ 명의의 인장은 인감도장이 아니라 박○○가 사채업자 등으로부터 금전을 차용할 때 사용하기 위하여 따로 만든 인장이었으며 , 수표로 받은 부분 중 먼저 받은 1억 원 에 대하여는 수표번호까지 기재되어 있으나 나중에 건네받은 5 , 000만 원에 대하여는 수표번호가 기재되어 있지 않아 사후에 허위로 조작된 것으로 보기에는 너무도 자연스 럽지 않은 부분이 많고 , 또한 인감증명발급대장의 기재에 의하면 박○○가 2004 . 12 . 9 . 인감증명서를 단 1통만 발급받았던 사실도 확인되며 , 이 날은 피고인 박○○으로부 터 받은 수표가 처음으로 사용되기 시작한 날이기도 하므로 , 위 차용증이 검찰 조사가 시작된 이후 허위로 조작된 증거라고 단정하기는 어렵다 ) , ⑤ 피고인 박○○이 위 1억 5 , 000만 원을 모두 현금이 아닌 100만 원권 수표로 교부하고 , 박○○가 그 수표들을 차용 명목대로 채무변제에 사용한 것으로 보이며 일부에 대하여는 자신의 이름으로 직 접 배서를 하여 사용하기도 한 점 및 ⑥ 수수한 금액이 1억 원 및 5 , 000만 원 합계 1 억 5 , 000만 원의 거액인 반면 그 무렵 대규모 공사를 수주하는 등 직접적으로 대가관 계 있는 이익을 피고인 박○○이 받았다고 보기는 어려운 점 등을 종합하여 보면 , 피 고인 송○○이 교부받은 위 1억 5 , 000만 원이 차용금일지도 모른다는 의심을 지우기 어렵다 .

D. Conclusion

Therefore, among the facts charged of this case, the charge of violation of the Act (Bribery) applicable to the aggravated punishment, etc. of each specific crime against Defendant ○○ among the facts charged of this case and the charge of giving brain water around December 2004 and around January 2005 through around February 2, 2005 constitutes a case where there is no proof of each crime, and thus, the charge is acquitted pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Reasons for both punishment

1. Defendant transmitted ○○

The crime of this case was committed by the Defendant, who is a senior public official belonging to ○○○○, a business-related company, received the money and entertainment of this case from ○○○, a high-ranking Park ○, etc., and received the bribe in relation to his duties. The defendant, who had been in a position to maintain the integrity of duties and to perform his duties fairly, received the bribe equivalent to KRW 9,167,200, while maintaining the integrity of duties. The defendant received the bribe of KRW 9,167,200 from a senior public official, who was in a position to perform duties fairly, and the contents thereof also received the bribe from a business-related company to a foreign country on several occasions. Thus, the crime was committed by seriously damaging the integrity of a public official meeting, fairness in the performance of duties, and trust of the general public on the fairness in the performance of duties, and by denying some of the profits received from the crime of this case, there is a need for strict punishment corresponding thereto.

However, the amount received directly in cash is only one million won, there is no criminal history against the defendant, the defendant seems to have sufficiently divided his/her mistake through a four-month prison life, the defendant contributed to the State by faithfully performing public service for not less than 20 years, and the defendant does not seem to have committed a separate official act in relation to the crime of this case, and other circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, etc., shall be determined as ordered by taking into account all the circumstances such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, family relation.

2. Defendant’s gambling ○

The crime of this case is deemed to have provided a bribe to Defendant Song○○ by providing the Defendant with pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 320,000 in relation to his duties, such as golf entertainment, and the above crime is highly likely to impair the integrity, fairness, etc. of public service personnel, and the Defendant has been sentenced to a fine as the crime of offering of a bribe even before, and the defendant has never denied the nature of the given bribe and did not reflect himself well. In light of the above, the corresponding punishment should be required.

However, the number of the offering of a bribe is only one time, and the amount of the bribe granted is not large, and the type of the offering of a bribe is also divided into Kim○○○, which has a close-friendly relationship with the defendant, and Kim○ and golf expenses, etc. by accompanying the defendant to Defendant Song○○, which is relatively weak. In addition, taking into account all the circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing, such as the defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and family relationship, the punishment as set forth in the order shall be determined.

Judges of the presiding judge

Judges

Judges