All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant’s money received by the Defendant was paid as expenses for obtaining the consent of neighboring residents necessary for permission of annual salary, medical waste business, and expenses for drawing up and designing sculptures. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and misunderstanding the fact, although it was not a consideration for the public official’s job duties.

In addition, the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles, it is difficult to exclude the possibility that the Defendant’s money was partially included in the same purport as the Defendant claimed.

However, in light of the circumstances stated by the court below, at least, the primary purpose of which is the provision of money to the defendant is to say that the provider was the name of the street funds for the public officials necessary for business permission, and among them, it includes part of the money as

However, it is reasonable to view that this is indivisiblely combined with street funds, and it is reasonable to view that the criminal facts of the defendant are committed against the entire amount given by the providers.

We do not accept the Defendant’s assertion of mistake or misapprehension of legal principles.

B. After the judgment of the first instance court on the unfair argument of sentencing, the Defendant seems to have not good health conditions, such as where the Defendant was involved in a traffic accident and the will end up.

However, there is no change in circumstances that may be considered favorable to the sentencing of the accused in relation to the instant case, such as the recovery of additional damage after the judgment of the first instance.

In addition, considering the conditions of sentencing as indicated in the records and arguments of this case and the reasons for sentencing of the lower judgment, the lower court also takes into account all the circumstances asserted by the Defendant and the Prosecutor on the grounds of appeal.