All appeals by the defendants and prosecutor are dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts as to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery) and misunderstanding of legal principles are merely borrowed KRW 30 million from B, and the Defendant does not have business relationship between the duties as the president of the association and KRW 30 million. 2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant of unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment and fine of KRW 30 million, detention in the workhouse, KRW 300,000,000) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B’s punishment (two years of suspended sentence for one year of imprisonment, and eight hours of community service) sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

C. Prosecutor 1) In regard to the offering of a bribe equivalent to KRW 15,160,381 and the offering of a bribe amounting to KRW 91,462,00 and the misunderstanding of legal principles as to the offering of a bribe amounting to KRW 15,160 and the offering of a bribe amounting to KRW 91,462,00 are recognized as the reconstruction association of this case. However, even if so, the Defendants can be found to have committed the crime of offering a bribe amounting to a third party and the crime of offering a bribe amounting to a third party. Therefore, the lower court’s failure to request the prosecutor

Judgment on the Grounds for Appeal

A. The lower court’s determination on the Defendant A’s assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles 1) held that the Defendant’s statement that the Defendant granted KRW 30 million in cash to give orders for construction related to the instant reconstruction project is reliable, and accordingly, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant received KRW 30 million in cash from B in relation to his/her duties as a bribe on or around March 8, 2013 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2) whether the Defendant borrowed money (see, e., Supreme Court Decision 1) or not (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da30000, Mar. 8, 2013).