The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) with the purpose of performing the construction business of water supply and drainage facilities and equipment construction business; and D (hereinafter “D”) with its trade name changed in sequence to I and J Co., Ltd.; hereinafter “D”).

As the representative director of the Dognam-do, Jeonnam-do is a person who has worked as a main agent of the government-funded government-funded project.

The Defendant will operate the public official in charge so that F technology can enter into F’s contract for the installation of excellent treatment facilities at the early stage of H road construction work ordered by J J Jin-gun, Nam-gu, Gwangju (hereinafter referred to as “F”) at the Gwangju-gu Office (hereinafter referred to as “F”).

In the case of success in contracts, 40% of the contract amount shall be awarded in return for the contract amount.

“The consent of G was received by proposing that “.”

On September 17, 2010, the Defendant received money of KRW 137,40,00 from K, the representative director of the F, to supply goods to be purchased at the early stage of the construction of H H road (the date of conclusion of the contract: December 31, 2009; hereinafter “instant contract”) under the pretext that the Defendant received money of KRW 137,40,000,00 from K, the name of the Defendant, at the request of the public official of the Gangwon-do Office of Gangwon-do, to give a contract with regard to the purchase of goods to be purchased at the end of the construction of the H road.

Accordingly, the defendant received money and valuables under the pretext of soliciting or arranging the affairs of public officials.

2. The fact that the Administrator of the Public Procurement Service, the judgment-based regional demanding administrative agency, entered into the instant contract with the F at the request of the Jeonjin-do Office, and the design drawing prepared by F in the process of entering into the instant contract was submitted, and F made and supplied an initial disposal facility according to the instant contract, and it seems that F paid KRW 137,400,000,000 to the Defendant as part of the money received as the price for the instant contract in accordance with the prior agreement with the Defendant.

However, the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court is found as follows.