The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (in 10 months of imprisonment with prison labor, 2 years of suspended execution, 20 million won of additional collection) is too unreasonable.

2. The instant crime was committed by the Defendant, immediately after the Defendant’s retirement from the tax accounting corporation at which he/she had been employed, and as a result, he/she received KRW 20,000,000 from the same tax accounting corporation, to stop tax investigation on the ground that the Defendant was a tax investigator and a university motive and to additionally receive KRW 20,000,000,000 from the tax accounting corporation.

The amount received by the defendant is not so much, and there is a risk that the trust in the purchase of the non-performance of the work performed by the public official will be damaged due to such crime is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the fact that the Defendant had no record of criminal punishment; the Defendant reflects the Defendant’s mistake while recognizing all of his criminal acts; the Defendant appears not to have requested or arranged for any solicitation; the Defendant’s commission of tax investigation to act as an agent instead of receiving money on the pretext of entertainment expenses, etc.; and the Defendant’s commission of tax investigation to receive more fees from a tax accounting corporation to receive more fees; the Defendant’s commission (15 million won) paid by the tax accounting corporation and the amount acquired from the instant crime (20 million won) within the scope of the commission fee (1.5 million won) paid by the tax accounting corporation from the tax accounting corporation; the Defendant deposited the additional collection charge equivalent to the instant crime at the lower court; the Defendant returned 20 million won to the tax accounting corporation at the trial; and the Defendant received punishment from both the tax accounting corporation and the Defendant’s commission of tax accounting corporation.