The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact-finding, the Defendant received money from the victim D in return for employment of K as a secretary-general from the victim I, but did not have promised to be a secretary-general, and thereafter performed a promise by hiring K through I. Of the money received from D as a referral expense, 30 million won was delivered to the Defendant, not the Defendant, but to I.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in mistake.

B. The lower court’s sentence (seven million won of fine) imposed on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The defendant and his defense counsel argued the misconception of facts in the court below. The court below rejected the above argument in detail with a detailed statement of the judgment on "the crime and the reason for sentencing" as alleged in the grounds for appeal. In addition to the above judgment of the court below, the court below rejected the above argument. In other words, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below: ① was sought to help F from the beginning to find K as a secretary for the National Assembly member, and F was introduced to H with the same purport by stating to the her husband, who was the defendant. The defendant was employed as a secretary for the National Assembly member, who was the person who was the person who was in a special relationship with and elected for the E member, and the other member of the National Assembly. Even at the time of giving money, the defendant consistently stated that "if he was aware of, he promised to work as a secretary for the E member even before the court below's judgment, and also stated to the same purport; ② H was also given money in an investigative agency to the same purport, but did not receive money from the office for the National Assembly member.

politically.