beta
Text
The judgment below
The guilty part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.
except that this shall not apply.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendants 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles are aware that Defendant A’s punishment was properly paid the service cost for the prop work directly performed by Defendant A, and at the above K’s request, Defendant A received a remittance of KRW 8.366 million to the account under the name of Defendant A, which was operated by Defendant A, and returned the entire amount of KRW 6.0 billion, excluding taxes, and there was no misunderstanding of facts, or embezzlement of the victim LA funds in collusion with K. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles on public offering and unlawful acquisition. 2) In so doing, the lower court’s punishment of unfair sentencing (Defendant A: three years of imprisonment, five years of suspended execution, Defendant B: imprisonment with labor for two years and six years and six years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.
B. The lower court found Defendant A guilty of the offering of bribe to P among the facts charged against Defendant A, but since P was not the representative or employee of S who is a specialized management businessman of the improvement project, Defendant A delivered money to P in relation to his duties.
Even if the crime of offering of bribe is not established.
C. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor 1-misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, it is reasonable to deem that F was a public official even after not only at the time of receipt of money from AF and T, but also at around May 201, 201. Furthermore, inasmuch as the Defendant was elected as the president of an association around July 2013, it is reasonable to deem that the objective punishment conditions provided for in the crime of acceptance of bribery were satisfied. However, even if F was given the money stated in No. 1-4 of the list of crimes in the judgment below, it was not probable that he would become a public official at the time of receipt of the money stated in the same list of crimes, and even if he was given the money stated in No. 5 of the same list, he was found not guilty of the Defendants on the ground that the objective punishment conditions were not fulfilled as long as it was found in the election of the president