beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year.
except that this judgment.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant A, in collusion with the J, intended to obtain permission for conversion of the forest land of the city of Ma, AB, AC, and K (hereinafter “each forest of this case”), and did not receive money and valuables from F under the pretext of solicitation or good offices for public officials, and there is no fact that the J has divided the amount of KRW 47 million received from F.
The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged on the basis of the testimony of J without credibility.
B) It was true that Defendant A received KRW 7 million from J, but it was only paid as the principal and interest for KRW 6 million that he lent to J on the early 2012. C) Defendant A transferred to F on December 31, 2012, KRW 5 million that Defendant A transferred to F on the part of F to F on the part of the Republic of Korea against whom the complaint was filed by F, not the return received in return for solicitation or good offices.
2) The fact that Defendant A lent to J and received KRW 7 million in total the principal and interest, which is not a false testimony contrary to the memory of the above Defendant. (b) Defendant B asserted mistake of facts on the grounds of appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing (the grounds of appeal by the Defendant and the prosecutor), but all withdrawals the allegation of mistake of facts other than unfair sentencing on the second day of the appellate trial. Defendant B’s imprisonment with prison labor (the Defendant A: one year of suspension of execution, two years of suspension of execution, additional collection 16 million won, community service work, 80 hours, etc., Defendant B: 10 months of probation, two years of suspension of execution, additional collection 16 million, and community service work for 80 hours, so the Defendants are too unfford, and the prosecutor is too unfford, and the prosecutor is too unfford.
2. Determination:
A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, since the violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act and perjury against the defendant A in the judgment of the court below are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the Criminal Act is applicable.