In case where a bank deposits the money received as a bribe and thereafter returns the same amount to the receiver, whether the value shall be additionally collected (affirmative)

If a bank deposits money received as a bribe, the deposit act constitutes a disposal act of the bribe. Thus, even if the receiver returns the same amount of money to the receiver, it cannot be viewed as a return of the bribe itself. In such a case, the equivalent amount should be collected from the receiver.

Article 134 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 78Do1844 Decided September 12, 1978

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Lee Han-soo

Daejeon District Court Decision 84No912 delivered on May 15, 1985

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal by defense counsel are examined.

According to the evidence of the first instance judgment maintained by the court below, the facts of the judgment are duly recognized and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts contrary to the rules of evidence, such as the theory of lawsuit, and if the facts are the same as the judgment of the court below, it is clear that the defendant constitutes the crime of acceptance of bribe. Therefore, the judgment below is just and there is no error of misapprehending the legal principles

If a bank deposits money received as a bribe, the deposit act constitutes a disposal act of a bribe. Thus, even if the receiver returns the same amount of money to the receiver, it cannot be viewed as a return of the bribe itself. In such a case, the amount should be collected from the consignee. Therefore, the court below's order to collect the money from the defendant is just and there is no error of law in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the collection of the money.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kang Jin-young (Presiding Justice)