The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding ① There is no fact that the Defendant received gift certificates from teachers or forced the provision of other money and valuables from teachers, and the Defendant received courtesy gifts that bring about teachers to life-saving, etc. ② In relation to fraud, the Defendant’s use of the gifted class guidance allowance of KRW 960,000 by receiving KRW 960,00 from teachers was in accordance with the direction of the principal, and was used on a school-related day, and there was no intention to obtain illegal acquisition. ③ In relation to occupational breach of trust, the Defendant merely performed the tasks of other teachers to provide meals for part of KRW 300,000,000, and conducted the tasks of other teachers to cause cash custody. Therefore, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two years of suspended sentence in August, fine of 3,00,000 won, community service, and additional collection in 80 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) With respect to misconception of facts, barring any special circumstance, such as where it is obviously recognizable that a public official received money, valuables, or other benefits from a person subject to his/her duties who received money, valuables, or other benefits from a previous public official, it is deemed that such person merely received or received a bribe from the previous public official in light of the social norms, or that there is no connection with his/her duties, barring any special circumstance, such as where personal friendly relationship is obviously recognized as a need for decentralization. If a public official received money and valuables in relation to his/her duties, even if he/she received money and valuables, such money and valuables are received as a bribe (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do903, Nov. 28, 2013).