beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor and fines of KRW 10,000,000.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A1) Defendant A’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles is Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”).
(2) There is a friendly relationship with the U.S.O., and upon its request, they receive personal reimbursement of expenses or money as stated in the facts charged (hereinafter “the money of this case”) from D for private purpose in order to prevent the article from being malicious to D.
(2) The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the receipt of the instant money and thereby falling under a bribe recognized as a quid pro quo, on the ground that it is merely the receipt of the said money. Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion that the Defendant’s receipt of the said money constitutes a bribe recognized as a quid pro quo. 2) Even if there was an allegation of unfair sentencing, the court below’s punishment (2 years of suspended execution for one year of imprisonment and fine 10,000,000, additional collection
B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendants (e.g., Defendant A: the same as above; Defendant B’s suspended sentence for six months of imprisonment) is too uneased and unreasonable.
2. Determination 1 ex officio against Defendant A: (a) Article 2(2) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes provides that an ex officio determination on the punishment of a fine imposed on Defendant A shall be concurrently imposed with a fine of not less than double but not more than five times; (b) In the instant case of the crime of acceptance of bribe, the lower limit of the fine shall be KRW 19,638,000 (=i.e., the amount of the accepted bribery amount of KRW 9,819,000 x 2) but the lower court sentenced the fine of KRW 10,00,000 beyond the scope of the punishment. If the lower court sentenced the fine of KRW 10,00,000 by discretionary mitigation, the lower court omitted because it did not explain Article 55(1)3 and 6 of the Criminal Act in the application of the statutes.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of acceptance of bribe against Defendant A.