The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. The sentence imposed by the court below (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. On May 31, 2007, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor and one year and six months for the offer of bribe at the Gwangju High Court, and on June 8, 2007, the Defendant was disqualified for suspended execution as he committed the instant crime after the judgment became final and conclusive.
However, when the defendant was in the trial for the first time, he was guilty of committing the crime of this case, the court below deposited 5 million won at the court below, and submitted the victim F's written agreement at the court for the first time, etc. It seems that considerable damage recovery was made. The defendant D's punishment was sentenced on January 15, 2013 in the Seoul Central District Court Decision 201Da1287, which was the first instance court's decision on January 15, 2013. In addition, in consideration of the defendant's age, character, character and environment, means and result, the conditions of sentencing specified in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, means and result, the punishment imposed by the court below is unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's argument is reasonable.
3. The decision of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act as the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.
The summary of the facts charged by this court and the summary of the evidence are all the facts charged in the judgment of the court below, except for the deletion of "the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the offering of a bribe at the Gwangju High Court on May 31, 2007, and was released on February 29, 2008 and for which the parole period has elapsed on April 22, 2008 during the execution of the sentence," and it is identical as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, they are quoted as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 347 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;
1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;
1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;