The judgment below

The part against the Defendants is reversed in entirety.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor and fines of KRW 8,000,000.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants 1) The lower court’s punishment (a year of imprisonment, a fine of 8,00,000,000 and additional collection) against Defendant A is too unreasonable.

2) Defendant B’s misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal principles, Defendant B did not receive AV costs from the co-defendant D (hereinafter “D”) of the first instance trial co-defendant A, the Secretariat of M N branch (hereinafter “M”), the co-defendant A and C, a co-defendant A, or was involved in paying the luminous travel expenses from D.

(2) The Defendant B participated in the payment of the AV costs and the expenses for the U.S. tour.

Even if Defendant B is merely a public official employed for translation and Chinese language, but is not a person in charge of the decision to grant subsidies to M and the inspection of its status, etc., Defendant B was paid the AV cost or the expenses for the luminous low-income travel together with Defendant A and C.

Even if there is no relation with duties, there is no crime of accepting bribe and third party bribe.

B) The sentence of the lower court against Defendant B (the imprisonment of six months, the suspension of the execution of the sentence of two years, the fine of 3,00,000 won and the penalty of additional collection) is too unreasonable.

3) Defendant CA’s mistake or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, (1) there was no fact that Defendant C participated in receiving AV costs from D with respect to the receipt of bribe related to the Chinese business trip and the third party acceptance of bribe.

(B) In particular, the crime of acceptance of a third-party bribe is established when a public official gives a bribe to a third party in exchange for an unlawful solicitation in connection with his duties. Defendant C does not constitute the crime of acceptance of a third-party bribe against Defendant C on the ground that there was no fact that he received an unlawful solicitation from D.

(2) As to events, such as each electronic record, and electronic records, Defendant C shall be granted subsidies for another purpose in violation of the terms and conditions of the granting of subsidies.