A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On November 8, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a surcharge of KRW 15 million in August to commit a violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act by the Seoul Northern District Court on November 8, 2012 and the said judgment became final and conclusive on the 16th of the same month.

On July 201, 201, the Defendant received a request from the victim G to the police officer in charge of F who is under investigation by the Gyeonggi Provincial Police Agency's living order division on the roads of E restaurant located in D, the Defendant made a request to the police officer in charge of sexual traffic, and received the request from the victim.

However, in fact, the Defendant was a plan to use the police officer in charge of the instant case with money received from the victim while he did not have the intent or ability to make a solicitation.

The Defendant stated that “The Defendant would give money to the police officers in charge in good faith with the police officers in charge,” and received KRW 5 million from the victim as the price for solicitation.

As a result, the defendant received money and valuables under the pretext of receiving the victim's property and soliciting the case handled by the public officials.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Protocol of the police statement concerning G;

1. Previous records: Criminal records and application of statutes governing judgment;

1. Article 111(1) of the Attorney-at-Law Act, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., circumstances and contents of a crime, the fact that the received money appears to have been returned, and the fact that it is a latter concurrent crime);

1. Article 116 of the Attorney-at-Law Act;