The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year and a fine of twenty thousand won.

The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

1. In light of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the fact that the defendant is against the defendant, the background leading to the crime, and the amount of money and valuables received by the defendant, etc., the punishment imposed by the court below (one year of imprisonment, fine of 20 million won, additional collection of 20 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. In the event that an ex officio penalty of imprisonment with prison labor and a fine are to be imposed concurrently, the punishment of imprisonment with prison labor shall be mitigated only and the punishment of a fine shall not be mitigated is unlawful.

(1) Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act provides that “The application column of the reasoning of the judgment by the court below shall be limited to imprisonment, and Article 55(1)6 of the Criminal Act shall be limited to imprisonment, and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act shall not be limited to imprisonment and the amount of fine shall not be reduced.”

In this respect, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on discretionary mitigation.

In addition, Article 2(2) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes provides that a fine of not less than double but not more than five times shall be imposed concurrently. In this case, if a fine has not been mitigated as above, the lower limit of the fine is KRW 40 million (i.e., the amount of the accepted bribery amount of KRW 20 million x 20 million) but the lower court erred by a fine of not more than 20 million, beyond the scope of the punishment. If the lower court imposed a fine of KRW 20 million by discretionary mitigation, the lower court did not explain Article 55(1)6 of the Criminal Act in the application of the law, and thus, erred by omitting the reasons for the judgment.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is erroneous by the above reasons.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) and (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment of the court below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.