The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is that the defendant received KRW 10 million from D as the price for legitimate defense activities, i.e., the fee, and not paid under the pretext of interfering with the prosecutor.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts charged and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination 1) The Defendant asserted the same purport in the lower court, and the lower court, based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated, determined that the Defendant received KRW 10 million from D under the pretext of the inspection.

2) Under Article 110 subparag. 1 of the Act, the term “school” means direct and indirect contact with the pertinent public official in a way that it is difficult to view it as a normal activity as a legal professional with public nature, such as entertainment or entertainment, private relationship or friendly relationship, in order to solve the requested case. Whether the attorney’s money and valuables, etc. received from the attorney is not a price or remuneration for legitimate counsel, but a school system should be determined by taking into account the following factors: (a) the details and amount of the receipt of the pertinent money and valuables, whether the attorney’s guidance was submitted, specific activities, and all other circumstances (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do3255, Nov. 23, 2006, etc.). Examining the circumstances described by the court below in light of the aforementioned legal principles and records, the judgment of the court below is justifiable, and there is an error of law by mistake as alleged by the defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.