All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant A et al. refers to "the defendant" without indicating the name of the defendant in each of the pertinent items, and the above defendant shall be referred to only the name, but a name shall be additionally stated if a specific name is required.

In light of the following: (a) the Defendant led to the instant crime; (b) the Defendant was unable to refuse the instant provision of money and valuables by actively providing money and valuables as the next source to the astronomical personnel of the Defendant who was pro-Japanese at the time; (c) the Defendant may be deemed to have given up the loan claim amounting to KRW 75 million for the Defendant; and (d) the Defendant actively cooperatedd in the investigation, such as the Defendant’s confession of the instant crime by himself/herself, under the circumstances in which he denied the delivery of money and valuables. In full view of the above, the sentence of the lower court (additional penalty amounting to KRW 1,568 million) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B: In the event that the Defendant received money from NN, the Defendant was placed in a special situation where he had lived economically and mentallylylylyly difficult at the time of receiving the money. ② The Defendant used most of the money as team expenses, such as meeting of departments, team personnel expenses, etc., and ③ the Defendant is a reduction of AD (State) at the time of committing the instant crime.

An abbreviationd name used by the court below (hereinafter referred to as the "afford name") shall be used immediately from the trial.

In full view of the fact that the sentence of the lower court (the penalty of KRW 1,70 million for imprisonment) is too unreasonable in view of the fact that the sentence of the same punishment as that of A, the head of the team, who was sentenced to the same punishment, was not in a position to exercise a critical influence in the selection of the subcontractor due to the vice head of the AI, is against equity.

C. Defendant C: Unfair sentencing (1) Determination of reduction of liquidated damages due to delay in the payment period of AT project was made in the course of legitimate business performance.