The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment regarding the acceptance of bribe in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court was justifiable to have convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, that “The Defendant received 50,000 U.S. dollars (500 U.S. page 10), upon the request of the employees of KG who want to receive construction work as a member of the design review evaluation committee for the part of the building structure of HG on January 28, 201 and received an appraisal favorable to them.”

In so doing, there were no errors by recognizing facts contrary to logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the legal principles on the establishment of the crime of acceptance of bribe.

2. As to the legitimacy of the collection

A. The grounds for additional collection, such as whether the subject matter of confiscation is subject to confiscation or the recognition of the amount of additional collection, are not related to the constituent elements of crime, and thus, it is not necessary to prove strict facts, but also necessary to be recognized by evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2005Do9858, Apr. 7, 2006). The recognition should reach a proof that there is no reasonable doubt.

B. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment, on November 7, 2013, which was about two years and nine months after the date of acceptance of bribe, the lower court acknowledged the fact that the Defendant returned 500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 to L, and L submitted it to the prosecution to the prosecution on November 14, 2013, which was returned by the Defendant, and the prosecution seized it. ① When the Defendant received 500 50 50 00 0 00 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00,000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0