(a) Scope of duties in the crime of bribery;

(b) If he returns any object received as the intention of acquisition, the surname of the crime of bribery;

A. In the crime of bribery, a public official's duty includes not only the official's duty under the law, but also the official's duty to assist or affect the decision-making authority.

B. If a bribe is received with the intention of acquiring it, it will not affect the establishment of the crime of bribery even if it was returned later.

Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act

A. Supreme Court Decision 65Do604 Delivered on November 22, 1966

Defendant

Defendant

Gwangju District Court Decision 82No564 delivered on December 2, 1982

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In relation to the crime of bribery, a public official's duties include not only the duties under the law, but also the duties that may assist or influence the decision-making authority, so the court below's decision that the defendant's act of receiving the money constitutes the crime of bribery because it is related to his duties that the court below decided. In addition, even if the defendant returned the money to Kim Jae-nam after about 10 days of the original money, it does not affect the establishment of the crime of bribery. Thus, even if the defendant returned the money to the third person, who was the third person after about 10 days of the original money, the defendant received it with the intention of acquisition, and it is justified in view of the records of the court below's decision that recognized the establishment of the crime of bribery.

In the judgment of the court below, there is no error in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to bribery, such as the theory of lawsuit, or in the incomplete deliberation or the violation of the rules of evidence, the lack of reason, or the omission of judgment. The court below did not order the defendant to collect additional tax, and there is no error in the judgment of the court below as to the collection of additional tax in the judgment of the court below, even if

The purport of the lower court’s holding that the Defendant received and accepted a bribe of KRW 300,000,000, including 91,000,000, such as vessel’s stables, etc., is clear that the Defendant’s acceptance amount of the bribe of KRW 300,000 is the remainder of KRW 209,000 excluding the amount of KRW 91,000,000, such as vessel’s stables, etc., and there is no error of incomplete deliberation or legal violation as pointed out. All arguments are groundless.

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

Justices Jeong Tae-tae (Presiding Justice)