beta
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, it is just for the court below to have found the defendant guilty of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery) except for the part of the bribery amounting to KRW 100 million among the facts charged in this case on or around December 2008, and violation of the Act on the Regulation and Punishment, etc. of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds. There is no error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the legal principles as to the relation of accomplice in bribery and the calculation of the amount of the bribery amount, or the scope of "a person who is a public official or an arbitrator" as alleged in the grounds of appeal.
In addition, among the reasons for appeal, the argument that the portion equivalent to KRW 70 million out of real estate acquired in the name of the defendant is not subject to confiscation, since it was not derived from criminal proceeds since it was prepared by the defendant, among the real estate sales proceeds acquired in the name of the defendant. However, the court below failed to exhaust all necessary deliberations, since the defendant's assertion that it was not subject to confiscation, or that the court below did not consider it as subject to ex officio determination, is only within the final appeal
B. In addition, the lower judgment did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine as alleged in the grounds of appeal on this part.
Meanwhile, pursuant to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. Thus, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal.