The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not receive money in return for an illegal solicitation regarding the conclusion of a contract agreement or the execution of a construction work or there was no misconception of facts with D.

On a different premise, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, which found the Defendant guilty of the charges.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 5 million, the additional collection of KRW 5 million, and the cost of lawsuit) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The Defendant asserted to the same effect as the lower court’s judgment.

The court below acknowledged the following facts based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., ① that G, the representative director of Eul and employees of Eul, requested the residents of the Seoul Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City E apartment complex to the effect that the residents of the city would suffer the cost due to the defect of the construction work and help the construction work to be completed smoothly, and delivered the cash of KRW 10 million to D, the representative director of the apartment house and the defendant who is the director of the council of occupants' representatives, and ② that D also received cash of KRW 10 million from G with the defendant, and divided the above cash of KRW 5 million by each of the defendant and the defendant, respectively, at that time, there was no reason to reduce the amount of KRW 5 million to the defendant individually. In light of the fact that D's statement consistent with C and G's statement, the court below acknowledged the fact that it received KRW 10 million,000,0000,000,000,000 from the defendant's request that the Corporation should complete the construction work.

Furthermore, the court below found the following facts or circumstances based on the same evidence, i.e., ① the defendant raised a problem with D in relation to the rupture repair and re-domination work in B.