All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental statements in the grounds of appeal filed by Defendant B and in the supplemental statements in Defendant F, to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental statements in the grounds of appeal not timely filed).

1. As to Defendant A’s grounds of appeal

A. On the ground of appeal No. 1, the lower court, based on its stated reasoning, was highly probable to be elected as a director, who is an officer of the AF district housing redevelopment and rearrangement project association (hereinafter “AF district redevelopment project association”) deemed as a public official in the application of penal provisions at the time when Defendant A received a bribe from Defendant A (hereinafter “AF district redevelopment project association”).

The decision was determined.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the scope of a person who is a public official

B. On the ground of appeal No. 2, the lower court, based on its stated reasoning, accepted money and valuables from Defendant A in return for an implied solicitation of specific act of providing various convenience in the process of concluding the main contract for removal services and performing the main contract.

The decision was determined.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and duly admitted evidence, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending

(c)

With respect to the third ground for appeal, the lower court determined that the crime of accepting bribe was established on the whole money and valuables received, on the ground that Defendant A implicitly and implicitly conspired with the president of the Partnership redevelopment within the AF Area AK, etc., and received bribe KRW 150 million from B.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and duly admitted evidence.