2012Gohap130, 161 (Joints), 170 (Joints)

(a) The name of the crime of acceptance of bribe (the name of a specific crime recognized partially);

violation of law (Bribery) 1)

(b) Offering of bribe;

(c) Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery);

(or) Acceptance of Bribes

1. (a) New ○○, and a public official;

Residential Chang-si window

Gyeong-nam, Gyeong-nam

2. (b) ○○ and Company Board;

Domicile, Busan Geum-gu

Head of the reference domicile

3. (a) Red ○○, and a public official;

Housing Changwon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City

Standard place of registration, Gyeongnam District;

4.(a)(b)Indones, ○○, Public Officials

Housing Changwon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City

Reference place of registration, Changwon-si

5. (b) Heo○, Construction Business;

Housing Changwon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City

[Reference domicile]

6. (b) Dog-○, Construction business;

Housing Changwon, Changwon, Masanpo-gu

Reference domicile Chang-si

7. (b) ○○, Construction Business

Housing Chang-gu Seoul Metropolitan City Member;

Reference domicile Masan City

8. (b) Dog-O, Construction;

Housing Changwon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City

Standard place of registration, Gyeong-nam District

9. (b) Kim○-, and manufacturing industry;

Residential Chang-si Counters

Presentment of reference domicile

10.C. Red ○○, Public Officials

Housing Changwon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City

Reference domicile City

Prosecutor’s non-compliance with the foregoing paragraph (Courtrooms, Courtrooms, Courtrooms), and Kim Jong-han (Courtrooms)

June 22, 2012

Defendant New ○○○ shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a period of five years and a fine of thirty hundred,00,000 won, by a fine of fifteen thousand,00,000 won, by imprisonment with prison labor for a period of two years, by Defendant Hong ○○○○, by imprisonment with prison labor for a period of four years and a fine of thirty million,00,000,000 won, Defendant Ho ○○○○○, by imprisonment with prison labor for a period of ten months, by a fine of three thousand,00,000 won, Defendant Song ○○○○, by imprisonment for a period of one year,00,000,00 won, by a fine of ten,00,00 won, Defendant Hong ○○○, by a fine of ten,00,00 won, by a fine of one year and six months, and fine of five,00,000, and by a fine of one year and half, 00, and 00 won.

In a case where Defendant New○○○, Lee○, Kim○, Park○, Park○, Park○, Park○, Kim○, Kim○○, and Red○○○ did not pay the above fine, the above Defendants shall be confined to the Defendant New○, and KRW 300,000, respectively, for the period of converting KRW 50,000,000, respectively, to the Defendant Lee○○, Park○, Park○, Kim○, and Red○, and KRW 50,000,000, respectively, for one day.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date when this judgment became final and conclusive.

81, 211, 667 won from Defendant New ○○○; 11, 335, and 00 won from Defendant Red○○○○; 67, 610, and 00 won from Defendant Red○○○○○; and 24,000, and KRW 00 from Defendant Red○○○○ shall be collected respectively. As to Defendant New ○○, Kim○, and Hong○, an amount equivalent to the above fines and additional charges; an amount equivalent to the above fines; an amount equivalent to the above fines against Defendant ○○, ○, Park○, Park○, and Kim○; and an amount equivalent to the above additional charges against Defendant Red ○○.

Facts of crime

m. Personal information

Defendant New ○○○ has served as a public official in charge of road maintenance and improvement (local civil engineering assistant) from the end of February 14, 2008 to January 22, 2009, who worked as a public official in charge of road maintenance and improvement (local civil engineering assistant), from the end of February 14, 2008 to the Construction and Transportation Bureau at the center of 151, to the Road Management Department of the Construction and Transportation Bureau of the Construction and Transportation Bureau (the integrated viewing and Transportation Bureau of the Construction and Transportation Bureau of the Construction on July 1, 201 to the end of February 8, 201, and from the end of February 2007 to the end of February 14, 2008, Defendant Red ○○ has worked as a public official in charge of road maintenance and improvement (the Construction and Maintenance Bureau of the Construction and Transportation Bureau of the Construction and Transportation Bureau of the Construction and Maintenance Bureau of the Construction and Maintenance Bureau of the Road from the Construction and Maintenance Bureau of the Construction and Maintenance Bureau of the Construction and Transportation Bureau of the Construction.

9. From January 22, 2009 to January 22, 2009, the head of the Chang-si Construction and Transportation Bureau shall assist the affairs of the Chang-si Construction and Transportation Bureau in general while working as the head of the secretary general of the secretary general of the administrative bureau, and the head of the administrative bureau, from January 23, 2009 to June 30, 2010, shall exercise overall control over the affairs of the original construction market, such as approval of the draft public notice, etc. of the affiliated community, such as the road maintenance system, and the head of the construction division of Seongbuk-gu Construction and Transportation from July 1, 201 to February 8, 201, shall be a public official of Grade V who assists in the affairs of the integrated original construction market as the head of the secretary general of the administrative bureau in the integration from February 9, 2011 to June 30, 2011.

In addition, the defendant's ○○○○○○○○ corporation (hereinafter referred to as "OO") that performs packaging and maintenance work business, etc. (hereinafter referred to as "OO")'s representative director, the defendant's ○○○○ corporation that performs packaging work (hereinafter referred to as "O○○")'s representative director, the defendant's ○○○○○ corporation that conducts packing work, etc. (hereinafter referred to as "O○○○" only)'s construction cost for a public procurement of less than 0 OOO's goods, (hereinafter referred to as "OO's construction cost for a public procurement of less than 0 O's goods, and (hereinafter referred to as "O's sales of goods")'s actual operator of 00 O's sales of goods, etc. (hereinafter referred to as "O's representative director")'s sales of goods, and (hereinafter referred to as "O's sales of goods")'s sales of goods, etc., the defendant's ○○ corporation and other public agencies's sales of goods.

In addition, in the case of Changwon-si, if the total construction cost, including government-funded material costs, in relation to the construction contract related to the road maintenance system, is less than KRW 100 million, each person in charge of the affairs shall draft the construction contract, and the head of the road maintenance guidance shall review the foregoing draft, and then approve this draft by the decision of the head of the road management division (the head of the road management division after February 8, 201).

1. Joint criminal conduct by Defendant New ○, Red ○, and Kim○-○

【Public Offering Relations

In the case of Defendant New ○○○, Red ○○, and Kim ○○○, and the Road Maintenance System (referring to roads after February 8, 201), with respect to the duties of each fraternity employee working at the above Road Maintenance System, using the above private contract and the majority supplier contract system, etc. ① The net construction cost shall not exceed 20 million won to the said construction contractor, and the cost of materials invested in the said construction shall not exceed KRW 100 million, while the said construction contractor registered as the party to the contract with the majority supplier or selected the goods registered as the party to the contract with the majority supplier to exclusively sell the goods registered as the other party to the contract (hereinafter referred to as “the purchase contract with the number”) and supplying the specific construction cost to the new construction contractor by selecting the goods registered as the excellent goods to the ○○○○○○○, or the construction cost to the new construction contractor to the new construction contractor to the extent that the new construction cost is actually reduced by a negotiated contract from each new construction contractor to the new construction contractor to the new construction contractor.

A. Defendant Shin-○○

[2] On June 1, 2011, the Defendant called to the ○○○○○○○ (Representative Director) affiliated with the company that performs road maintenance and improvement works in relation to the roads and the office of the said Construction and Transportation Bureau (hereinafter referred to as “O”) on the following grounds: (a) pursuant to the above public offering relationship, the Defendant: (b) called to the ○○○○○○○ (hereinafter referred to as “O”) affiliated with the said office; (c) ordered a bid at Chang-si and awarded a contract for the procurement to select the goods of the OOOO; and (d) made it possible for the ○○○○○○ to supply the entire knives of the said goods to provide the entire knives of the said goods. The Defendant agreed to obtain KRW 80,965,500, the total construction cost of the said knife portion, which is 15% of the construction cost in return for the construction work. The Defendant, in collusion with the 500,001.

On August 2011, 201, a bribe of KRW 15 million in relation to duties of the above ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, which was located near the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○,

A total of 37 times, as described in attached Table (1), (2), and (3), including those received from a police officer from February 2, 2008 to January 201, 2008, and the road management of construction and transportation stations, including those received from a police officer from a police officer at the beginning of February 2008 to a police officer at the beginning of January 201, 201.

Since then, in collusion with the internal ○○○○, red ○, and Kim○○, a road maintenance gate, the road maintenance gate, received gift certificates equivalent to KRW 7,400,000 and KRW 14,690,000 as a bribe in relation to the duties under the pretext of a contract for free or several purchase from OOO representative director, OOO representative director, OOOO, OOOO, and OOO director, who is the actual operator of OO in the above manner.

[2] According to the above public offering relationship, the Defendant, on June 2008, called a company that performs road maintenance and improvement works at the roads and offices of the said creative viewing and transportation station, in relation to the road maintenance and improvement works for himself/herself and the road maintenance and improvement instructors, called a company (ju), the actual operator of ○○, and the representative director of OOOO, called “○,” and called a free contract reward for construction works ordered by the road maintenance and improvement system until now. The Defendant called “the purport was to the effect”

From June 22, 2008 to February 28, 2008, the Defendant conspired with Red ○○ to receive a bribe of 5 million won in connection with the duties of the said creative viewing road, documents, storage, or OOO located near OOOOO located near OOOOOOOO located in the window of the city of Changwon, and to January 2, 2012, the Defendant conspired with the Defendant to receive a bribe of 5 million won in connection with the duties of the Defendant, among the police officers of Jan. 2, 2008 to the day of Jan. 2, 2008, (5), and (6) on 48 occasions in total, with the road management and traffic station (road and road after February 8, 201) for a total of 10, Red ○○, Kim O, representative director of the ○○, GO, GO, OO, ○○, and ○○○ or ○○ in succession.

B. Defendant Kim-○ (joint criminal conduct with Defendant Shin-○○)

The Defendant agreed to receive KRW 15 million from ○○○ director and KRW 15 million through ○○○○, such as the above A-OO’s 1) according to the above public offering relationship, as described in the above A-O’s 1). Of August 201, 201 through ○○.

Police Officer’s bribe in connection with his duties after receiving KRW 15 million from the original ○○○, which was directed by the said OOO’s representative director, in the vicinity of the OOOO located in the OOO of the window of Changwon-si.

From January 8, 2009 to January 201, 2012, the Defendant conspired with the following: (a) Nos. 2 through 11 of the crime inundation table (1); (b) Nos. 6 through 22 of the crime sight table (3); (c) Nos. 4 through 16 of the crime sight table (4); (d) Nos. 5 through 12 of the crime sight table (5) and Nos. 5 through 20 of the crime sight table (6) on a total of 68 occasions in collusion with the Road Management of the Construction and Transportation Bureau; (c) Nos. 700,000, 700, 700, 700, 700, 700,000, 700,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

C. Defendant Red○○ (joint principal offender with Defendant New○○)

On December 208, 2008, the Defendant called OOO’s director, a company that performs road maintenance works, etc. in relation to the roads and offices of the above Changwon Construction and Transportation Bureau, and called OOO’s director, a company that performs road maintenance works, etc. in relation to the road packing works at the above OO’s office, and called 10 million won in return for the call. The Defendant agreed to receive KRW 10 million in return for the call.

Around December 18, 2008, the Defendant, through new ○○○○, received a bribe of KRW 10 million from a director of 00,000,000,000 from the directors of ○○○○○○, who was an OO’s representative director, around 00, around December 18, 2008, in collusion with the annexed Table (1), Nos. 2 through 5 of the crime day table (3), Nos. 1 through 3 of the crime day table, crime day table (4), 2 through 4 of the crime day table, (5), 2 through 4 of the crime day table, and 14 times in total, such as the list of 00,000, 2 through 4, 2 through 4, 14, 200, 000, 000, 000, 00,000, 000 or more, 00,000.

2. The Defendant, as indicated in the foregoing paragraph 1-A(1) above, provided KRW 150 million in total over 11 times between the police officers around December 2008 and August 201, 201, as indicated in the attached Table of Crimes (1) as follows: (a) from around 000 to around 000 at the window OOOO of Changwon-si, SOOOO on August 201, the Defendant: (b) granted KRW 10 million through OOOO directors’ OOOOOO directors for a purchase contract that selected the klives for preventing the softs supplied by OOOOO to OO; and (c) granted a bribe to public officials in connection with their duties; and (d) granted KRW 9 million in total as between the police officers around December 2008 to August 2, 2011 by the above method.

3. Defendant’s gambling ○

On January 1, 2011, the Defendant issued a bribe of KRW 7,40,00 won in total four times in the following manner as shown in attached Table (2) between September 201 and September 201, the Defendant offered a bribe of KRW 1,80,000,000 to New ○○ by means of a private contract for 'the entrance improvement of the entrance and surface of OOO' in the vicinity of OOOOOOO located in Seocho-si, Changwon-si, SOO, and offered a bribe of KRW 7,40,000,000 from that time to that time, as described in attached Table (2).

4. Defendant Doz. ○○

On February 1, 2008, the Defendant offered a bribe of KRW 250,000,000 in total and KRW 8,50,000,00 from that time to January 2, 2012, as indicated in the attached Table of Crimes (3) as follows: (a) the Defendant, as a reward for giving three construction works, including “○○○○ Housing Site,” and “one re-Packing construction work,” to the new ○○○○ in the passenger car operated by himself; (b) cash 2.5 million, KRW 100,000,000,000, and KRW 100,000,000,000,000,000, in total two times in total, as indicated in the attached Table of Crimes (3).

5. Defendant transmitted ○○

On June 208, 2008, the Defendant, like the foregoing paragraph 1-A (2) of the above, provided three (3) construction, such as “the installation of facilities to prevent the collapse of a hybrid branch” in the vicinity of a document warehouse or the above OOOO, and provided 5 million won as a honorarium for the public official’s duties by providing four (4) materials sales to new OO under a negotiated contract, from that time until January 2012, the Defendant provided a bribe of KRW 160 million in total, as described in the attached list of crimes (4).

6. Defendant’s gambling ○

On May 208, 2008, the Defendant issued a bribe of KRW 2 million in total and KRW 12,000,000,000, in total, as shown in the List of Crimes (5), to a police officer from January 2, 2008 to June 2, 2012, to a new ○○○ in the form of a private contract on the following: (a) the Defendant, as a honorarium, provided a reward for KRW 2,00,00,000 to a new ○○ in the form of a private contract, from May 2, 2008; and (b) provided a gift certificate and KRW 3,1,000,000,00,000, in total, to a police officer from January 2, 2008 to January 2, 2012.

7. Defendant Kim○-○

The defendant, like the above paragraph 1-A (2) of the above paragraph, issued 2,40,000 won as a honorarium to allow the defendant to exclusively use materials, such as twits, etc. from the above creative viewing road management and document storage, such as "living environment creation project, such as the original twits," etc. from the above creative viewing road management and document storage, and offered a bribe in relation to the public official's duties.

On September 201, 201, a total of 40,3100,000 won, as shown in the list of crimes (6) was granted to a bribe between the first police officer and the first police officer, as shown in the list of crimes (6).

[2012 Gohap170]

▣ 전제사실

Defendant Hong○○ election campaign against the present Changwon market, which is a three-way market, and academic studies with the Changwon market.

The relationship is very closely related to the creative market. As above, the person who served as the secretary of the secretary-general of the administrative bureau prior to the integration has worked as the head of the administrative bureau prior to the integration. The series of these classes is known to have considerable influence among the public officials of the original viewers, such as the first consignment to the head of the Water and Wastewater Works Center and the promotion of the officer in charge. In addition, after the establishment of the integrated creative city on July 1, 2010, Red○○ actually worked as the head of the Seongbuk-gu Construction Division, while serving as the head of the integrated creative city on February 9, 2011, and returned to the head of the secretary-general of the administrative bureau in the creative city on February 9, 2011, and has been serving as the head of the administrative bureau in the creative city and has served as the head of the administrative bureau prior to the integration. In addition, a person who is highly likely to exercise overall influence over roads, construction and other civil affairs, the series of class of electrical affairs, and public officials in the public service sector.

8. Defendant Red ○

On April 209, the Defendant received 200,000 won through new ○○, a senior 7th class in the same field, on the pretext of giving and receiving a bribe in connection with his duties, from that time to that time during January 2012, the Defendant received 20,000 won in total nine times from Kim○, 24,000 won, in total nine times as shown in the attached list of crimes (7), from a public official, under the pretext of giving and receiving a bribe from the head of Kim○, a road maintenance center, Kim○, the head of a road maintenance department, for convenience in performing duties, such as approving road maintenance services, and promoting employees belonging to the road maintenance department, moving in positions, etc. in the office.

9. Defendant Kim○-○

The Defendant, as described in paragraph (8) above, delivered a total of KRW 24 million to Hong○○ on nine occasions under the pretext of providing business convenience and commissioning the personnel administration, as shown in the List of Crimes (7) between the Hadman and the Hadman from April 2009 to January 2012, and granted a bribe in relation to public official’s duties.

Summary of Evidence

[Attachment 2012 Gohap 130, 161]

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each protocol of examination of the suspect about ○○ and ○○○;

1. Statement made by each prosecutor on the original ○○ and Park ○○;

1. A written statement prepared at ○○○;

1. A copy of the protocol of interrogation of the suspect with respect to the defendant 's new ○○' which was attached to the prosecutor's office (No. 4 times) without indicating the date, and a copy of the protocol of interrogation of the suspect with respect to the prosecution (No. 5 times);

1. Pocketbooks, copies of daily table, and details of each account transaction attached to the suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant Lee ○-○ by the prosecution (secondly attached) on the defendant Lee ○-○;

1. The suspect's interrogation protocol against the defendant Kim ○-○ (the first time) attached to the prosecutor's office;

1. A detailed statement of entry into and withdrawal from each account attached to each protocol of interrogation of the suspect about the defendant Do○○-○ by the prosecution (secondly attached)

1. A copy of accounting books attached to the suspect examination protocol of the defendant Park ○-○;

1. Books attached to the suspect examination protocol of the defendant Park ○-○ by the prosecution, and details of passbook transactions;

1. Each protocol of seizure;

1. Each investigation report (a warrant of search and seizure verification 2012- 1259 execution results - ○○○○○○○, Integrated Changwon, and each company to attach documents verifying the details of conclusion of a contract, attaching documents verifying the actual details of the construction work, attaching documents verifying the details of information, attaching documents verifying the details of the construction work, attaching documents attached to a cash storage document, attaching a list of employees, such as a road and a corporation account statement, attaching a cash storage document, attaching a list of employees, such as an original road, and submitting a report on the date of personnel transfer, attaching documents related to the construction and material transfer of Kim○○○, and attaching documents related to the contract for the road industry ○○○○○○○○○

[2012 Gohap170]

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each prosecutor's interrogation protocol on red ○○;

1. Each prosecutor's statement on the ○○○, Professor, and ○○;

1. Each written statement of EO, Ma○○, Ma○○, Ma○○, Ma○○, Ma○○○, ○○○○, and ○○○○○○, respectively. Each investigation report (a report on confirmation related to the implementation of a regular audit in 2011, including the details of restoration of the message deleted from the mobile phone of Kim○○, and the monetary content of Red○, ○○, ○○, ○○, and ○○, and attaching the details of the lower leave of Hong○, respectively);

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

A. Defendant New ○○○○: Article 2(1)1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 129(1) (a) of the Criminal Act, Article 129(1)2 of the Criminal Act, Article 2(1)2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act (the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, including the acceptance of bribe from ○○ and Ma○○○, and the fact of acceptance of bribe from Ma○○ and Ma○○, including the fact of acceptance of bribe from Ma○○), Article 2(1)3 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 129(1)(a) of the Criminal Act, including the fact of acceptance of bribe from Ma○○ and Kim ○, and selection of imprisonment with labor)

B. Defendant Lee ○-○: Articles 133(1) and 129(1) of the Criminal Act (the offering of a bribe, including, but not limited to, the offering of a bribe)

C. Defendant Red○○: Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act (a) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “Aggravated Punishment, etc.”) (hereinafter “Defendant Red○○○○”); Article 2(1)2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of the Specific Crimes; Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter “Aggravated Punishment, etc. of the Bribery”); Article 2(1)3 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes; Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter “Aggravated Punishment, etc. of the Bribery”); Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of the Bribery from this○○○ and Kim○○○○; Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of the Bribery of the Bribery; Article 133(1) and Article 129(1)(1) of the Criminal Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of the Bribery of the Bribery

E. Defendant Do○○○: Articles 133(1) and 129(1) of the Criminal Act (the offering of a bribe, including the offering of a bribe, the offering of a bribe), 133(1)

F. Defendant Park ○-○: Articles 133(1) and 129(1) of the Criminal Act (the offering of a bribe, including, but not limited to, the offering of a bribe)

G. Defendant ○○: Articles 133(1) and 129(1) of the Criminal Act (the offering of a bribe, including the offering of a bribe, the offering of a bribe), 129(1)

H. Defendant Park ○-○: Articles 133(1) and 129(1) of the Criminal Act (the offering of a bribe, including, but not limited to, the offering of a bribe)

(i) Defendant Kim-○: Articles 133(1) and 129(1) of the Criminal Act (the offering of a bribe and, in combination, the offering of a bribe), 133(1) of the Criminal Act

(j) Defendant Red○○: Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act (a) (in all respect of acceptance of bribe and acceptance of bribe, choice of imprisonment)

1. Imposition of fines concurrently;

Defendant NewO, Kim ○, and Red ○○○: Article 2(2) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (in the case of New ○○, both penalties shall be imposed on the amount received after December 26, 2008, when the provisions of fines are newly established and enforced)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

(a) Defendant Newly-○○○: The aggravated punishment of concurrent crimes resulting from a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery) on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery) for a person who has committed the most severe punishment.

(b) Defendant Red○○○: the aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes on the grounds of the crime of acceptance of bribe on the part of the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2 of the Criminal Act, and Article 38(1)2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes on the part of a person who has the largest number of mines). Defendant Kim○○: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [an aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Defendant New ○○ and Kim○: Articles 53, 55(1)3, and 6 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing)

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Defendant New○○, ○○, ○○, Kim○, Ga○, Ga○○, Park ○, Kim○, and Red○○: Articles 70 and 69(2) of each Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution;

Defendant Hu○○ and Song○○: Article 62(1) of each Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances are considered for the reasons for sentencing)

1. Additional collection:

Defendant New ○○, Red ○, Kim○, and Red ○○: The latter part of Article 134 of each Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Defendant NewO, EO, RedO, RedO, KimO, Park ○, Park ○○, KimO, and Hong○: Reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Defendant Shin-○○

[Scope of applicable sentences under the Act] Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than five years but not more than 22 years and not more than 6 months;

[Determination of Type] Bribery. Acceptance of bribe (Type 5, KRW 100 million to KRW 500 million)

【General Adopteds】

○ Mitigation elements: Serious reflector no record of criminal punishment;

○ Aggravations: Acceptance of bribe for a long period of not less than two years;

[Scope of Recommendation] Basic Area: Imprisonment for 7 years to 10 years;

[Determination of Sentence] Five years of imprisonment and fine of 300 million won

In light of the fact that the defendant, as a seat of the Road Maintenance System, plays a role in managing the expenses of the department, received money from the companies in relation to the negotiated contract, and that the amount received is very large over a period of not less than two years, it is necessary to strictly punish the defendant.

However, the defendant confessions and reflects his/her criminal act, and actively cooperates in the investigation process, and appears to be in charge of the provision and distribution of money and valuables that have been carried out in the position of road maintenance meters, and the money and valuables received from the company can be distributed to its employees on a life saving season or a leave season and partly used as operating expenses, and the amount actually acquired by the defendant seems to be significantly small if the amount actually acquired is not paid by the company, the full amount of the amount equivalent to the surcharge is deposited, the fact that the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive and means of the crime, result, the circumstances and money and valuables after the crime are distributed, and the amount of money and valuables is distributed to the person who has not been prosecuted, and the punishment is determined as ordered by the sentencing guidelines.

2. Defendant ○○○: A fine of KRW 15 million.

Although the Defendant granted a bribe of KRW 59 million to a public official and the nature of the crime is not less than that of the Defendant, the Defendant determined the punishment as ordered in consideration of the sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and means of the crime, consequence, and circumstances after the crime.

3. Defendant Red○○

[Scope of applicable sentences in law] Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than one month but not more than seven years and not more than six months;

[Determination of Type] Bribery. Acceptance of bribe (Type 4, 5, 000,000 or more to KRW 100,000)

【General Adopteds】

○ Mitigation elements: Serious radius

[Scope of Recommendation] Basic Area: Imprisonment for 5 years to 7 years;

[Standards for Handling Multiple Crimes] Two years and six months from six months to seven years (the most severe crime as a result of the total sum of bribe amounts is higher than two stages, so the minimum limit of sentence scope 1/2 shall be mitigated)

[Determination of Sentence] Two years of imprisonment

In light of the fact that the Defendant received money and valuables from a private company from a new ○○, which was a seat, even though he was above the general direction and supervision over the overall business as a road upgrade leader, it is inevitable to punish the Defendant with strict penalty corresponding thereto.

However, the defendant is led to the confession of the crime, his mistake is divided and reflected, there is no criminal record of the suspension of execution or more except five times of a fine, and he has served as a public official for about twenty years in good faith without a disciplinary action, and the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive and means of the crime, result, circumstances after the crime was committed, money and other valuables are distributed, but has not been prosecuted, the scope of recommendations according to the sentencing criteria shall be set as the order, taking into account the balance with the person who has been not prosecuted.

4. Defendant Kim ○○

(a) Scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment for not less than three years and six months but not more than twenty-two years and six months;

(b) Basic crimes within the scope of recommendations;

[Determination of Type] Bribery. Acceptance of bribe (Type 5, KRW 100 million to KRW 500 million)

【General Adopteds】

○ Reduction element: If the degree of participation or the actual amount of profit is minor, it shall not be more than half.

○ Aggravations: Acceptance of bribe for a long period of not less than two years;

[Scope of Recommendation] Basic Area: Imprisonment for 7 years to 10 years;

- 20 -

2) Concurrent crimes

[Determination of Type] Bribery. Bribery (Types 1, 3, and less than 0 million won)

【Special Convicted Persons】

○ Reduction element: where the consignee complies with the affirmative demand;

【General Adopteds】

○ Mitigation elements: Serious radius

[Scope of Recommendation] Reduction Area: Imprisonment of one month to six months;

[Standards for Dealing with Multiple Crimes] Imprisonment with prison labor of 4 years to 8 months to 10 years (the aggregate amount of bribe received)

1/3 of the lower limit of the scope of sentence shall be mitigated, and 1/2 of the upper limit of the basic crime shall be added to 10 years, which is the upper limit of the basic crime.

(c) Determination of sentence: Imprisonment with prison labor for 4 years and fine for 300 million won is inevitable in view of the fact that the defendant received money and valuables from a negotiated enterprise from a new ○○○, which was a next seat, even though he was in the position of overall direction and supervision of the overall affairs of the road upgrade system, and that the received money and valuables amounting to 300 million won, and that a bribe has been given to the Hong○, who is a higher public official on the pretext of solicitation, etc.

However, in consideration of the fact that there has been no record of criminal punishment in addition to the punishment before 20 years prior to the punishment, that there has been no record of criminal punishment for more than 30 years, and that there has been a sincere public official life for more than 30 years, and the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive and means of crime, results, circumstances after the crime, and money and valuables have been distributed, but the extent of recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines has

5. Defendant Doz.

[Scope of applicable sentences in law] Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than one month but not more than five years;

[Determination of Type] Bribery; Bribery

【Special Convicted Persons】

○ Reduction element: where the consignee complies with the affirmative demand;

【General Adopteds】

○ Mitigation elements: Serious reflector no record of criminal punishment;

[Scope of Recommendation] Reduction Area: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year to two years

【Suspension of Execution】

○ Major reasons for the negative reference: If the amount of a bribe is at least 50 million won;

○ Major reasons for writing: Excellent prestigiousness (self-denunciation, confession, accusation, etc.)

○ Reasons for general participation: There is no criminal record of a stay of execution or more;

[Determination of Sentence] Ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence

In light of the fact that the defendant provided a public official with money and valuables of 87 million won over a four-year period, it is inevitable to punish the public official with severe punishment corresponding thereto.

However, the defendant has led to the confession of the crime, his mistake is divided and reflected, and the fact that there is no record of criminal punishment other than once of a fine, etc. In addition, considering the sentencing conditions shown in the records, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means, consequence, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the punishment shall be determined like the order, by deviating from the scope of recommended punishment on the sentencing guidelines.

6. Defendant’s gambling ○: A fine of three million won.

Although the nature of the offense by giving a lot of bribe to a public official is not weak, the punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into consideration the following factors: (a) the confession of the offense and reflects his mistake; (b) active cooperation in the investigation process; (c) there is no record of criminal punishment other than fines due to drunk driving; and (d) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and means of the offense; and (b) the motive and means of the offense; and (c)

7. Defendant transmitted ○○

[Scope of applicable sentences in law] Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than one month but not more than five years;

[Determination of Type] Bribery; Bribery (Type 4, 100 million won or more)

【Special Convicted Persons】

○ Reduction element: where the consignee complies with the affirmative demand;

【General Adopteds】

○ Mitigation elements: Serious reflector no record of criminal punishment;

○ Aggravations: in a case where business relations are high.

[Scope of Recommendation] Reduction Area: Imprisonment for 2 years to 3 years;

【Suspension of Execution】

○ Major reasons for the negative reference: If the amount of a bribe is at least 50 million won;

○ Major reasons for writing: Excellent prestigiousness (self-denunciation, confession, accusation, etc.)

○ Reasons for general participation: There is no criminal record of a stay of execution or more;

[Determination of Sentence] One year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution

The defendant has provided public officials with money and valuables of KRW 110,00,000 over three years and six months, and it is inevitable to impose strict punishment corresponding thereto.

However, in light of the favorable circumstances, such as the confession of a crime, the fact that the defendant commits a crime, repents his mistake, and reflects his fault, the fact that there is no record of criminal punishment, etc., the sentencing conditions indicated in the record, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means, consequence, etc., shall be determined by deviating from the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines, and the punishment shall be determined like

8. Defendant’s gambling ○: A fine of seven million won.

Although the nature of a crime is less than that of a public official by providing money and valuables of KRW 32 million, the punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into consideration the following factors: (a) the confession of a crime and the absence of the record of his/her criminal punishment; (b) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means, consequence, etc. of a crime; and (c) the sentencing conditions indicated in the records,

9. Defendant Kim ○○: Fine of nine million won.

In light of the fact that the Defendant provided a public official with money and valuables worth KRW 40,000,00 to a public official while running a construction business despite the record of suspended sentence due to a crime of acceptance of bribe, etc. at the time of his public official’s employment, it is necessary to punish the Defendant with severe punishment corresponding thereto. However, the Defendant’s confession and mistake are contrary to the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and means of crime, consequence, etc., and the sentencing conditions indicated in the record, such as

10. Defendant Red○○

[Scope of the applicable sentences under the Act] Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than one month, but not more than five years;

[Determination of Type] Bribery. Acceptance of bribe (Type 2, 1,00,000 or more to KRW 3,000,000 or more) (general prison)

○ Mitigation elements: Serious reflector no record of criminal punishment;

○ Aggravations: Cases of having high relevance to acceptance of bribe for a long period of not less than two years;

[Scope of Recommendation] Basic Area: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year to three years

[Determination of Sentence] Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months and fine for a fine of 50 million won

The Defendant received money and valuables on the pretext of solicitation from subordinate employees, even though he/she was responsible for eradicating the practices of receiving money and valuables by subordinate employees as a manager, and given money and valuables from subordinate employees in consideration of the fact that the amount received exceeds KRW 24 million, etc., it is inevitable to punish the equivalent amount.

However, under favorable circumstances, the defendant is led to confession and reflects his mistake, and has served as a public official for 30 years, the records of criminal punishment and the fact that there is no disciplinary action as a public official, etc., the punishment as ordered shall be determined in consideration of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive and means of the crime, results, circumstances after the crime, etc.

Judge Park Jong-chul

Judges Mabio Ma

Judges Lee Lee-hoon

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.