The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

A sum of KRW 100 million shall be collected from the defendant.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and improper sentencing)

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles 1) The claim on the issue of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (A) the permission for funeral hall in relation to the F’s land belonging to the public official’s duties does not belong to the duties of the public official, such as the head of I and I for the following reasons. Thus, the defendant cannot be deemed to have received money and valuables in relation to the referral of “matters belonging to the duties of

① In this case, a public official’s act of acting as a broker is not a building permit under the Building Act for the new construction of a funeral hall, but a request is made to cancel all legal restrictions, such as restrictions on development, so that a funeral hall can be constructed on the F-owned land.

Nevertheless, on the ground that the building permit for the new construction of a funeral hall is included in the duties of the head of the Gu, the defendant received money and valuables to arrange matters belonging to the duties of the head of the Gu, etc.

The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and legal principles.

(2) The cancellation of a development restriction zone under the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones (hereinafter referred to as the "Act on Special Measures for Development Restriction Zones") shall belong to the duties of the Minister of Construction and Transportation.

Since the development restriction zone management plan under Article 11 of the Act on the Development Restriction Zones cited by the court below is a management plan within the development restriction zone that does not include the cancellation of the development restriction zone, it cannot be deemed that the affairs concerning the designation and cancellation of the development restriction zone belongs to the duties of the head of the I head of the Gu.

In addition, the fact that the head of the Gu has the authority to present opinions on the establishment of a management plan under the Building Act and the development restriction zone under the Act is not sufficient to recognize the closeness between the duties to cancel the development restriction zone for funeral hall and the duties of the head of the I Gu, etc.

B) The defendant related to the consideration has received or disbursed the defendant.