The judgment below

Among them, the guilty part of the 300 million won water in breach of trust shall be reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The Defendant was indicted on the charge of taking property in breach of trust by receiving KRW 300 million from B in response to illegal solicitation on August 2008, 2008, of taking property in breach of trust by receiving KRW 200 million in police officers on March 2009, and of taking property in breach of trust by receiving KRW 21.5 million in sight at the market price at the end of December 2007. The lower court acquitted the Defendant on the charge of taking property in breach of trust by receiving property in sight from each of the above facts charged against the Defendant, and the prosecutor appealed on the charge of taking property in breach of trust by receiving KRW 21.5 million in sight at the market price at the end of December 2007, and the part of

In addition, on March 2008, the judgment of the party before remanding the case was judged guilty of taking property in breach of trust by 300 million won as a policeman, and judged not guilty of taking property in breach of trust by 200 million won as a policeman in the middle of March 2009, and each of the defendant and the prosecutor appealed. The Supreme Court accepted the defendant's appeal and reversed the guilty portion, and dismissed the prosecutor's appeal. Accordingly, the part of the judgment of the party before remanding the case became final and conclusive as it is.

Therefore, the portion of innocence is not included in the subject of the judgment of this court, and this court is to judge only the guilty portion of the judgment prior to remand (the part of the judgment of this court prior to remanding KRW 300 million by giving and receiving KRW 300 million in police officer).

2. Grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of the facts as to Defendant 1) The Defendant is a stock company B (hereinafter “I”) from a police officer in the middle of August 2008.

There is no fact that the lower court’s sentence (two years of imprisonment) against the Defendant in an unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable in receiving KRW 300 million in cash in response to an illegal solicitation that would not take measures to recover the claim against the Defendant.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant by the Prosecutor is too uncomfortable.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts

A. The crime of taking property or property in breach of trust under Article 357(1) of the Criminal Act is committed by a person who administers another’s business in exchange for an illegal solicitation in connection with his/her duties.