beta
Text
All part of the judgment of the court below and the judgment of the court of first instance against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for eight months.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. As to the Prosecutor’s Grounds of Appeal
A. As to the assertion on the accepted amount, the lower court determined that, based on its stated reasoning, the amount paid for the purchase cost of the safe money among the money that Defendant B delivered to Defendant A by Defendant B cannot be deemed a bribe.
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court’s determination is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules,
B. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the record, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that: (a) there was no evidence to acknowledge that Defendant A committed an unlawful act, such as allowing Defendant A to smoke tobacco or allowing a public telephone to use beyond the limited time; and (b) the provision of meat during the external work cannot be deemed an unlawful act committed in return for the acceptance of bribe and the payment thereof; and (c) contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation
2. As to Defendant A’s ground of appeal
A. In light of the reasoning of the lower judgment and the evidence duly admitted by the lower court as to the assertion on the acceptance of bribe, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that Defendant A received KRW 5.22 million, excluding the purchase cost from Defendant B on May 22, 2007 to December 27, 2007, and KRW 5.2 million on November 3, 2008, as a bribe, for the reasons indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.
B. As to the assertion on the concurrent imposition of fines, it is amended by Act No. 9169 on December 26, 2008.