The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be sentenced to imprisonment of 2 years and 60,000,000 won.

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

A. In fact, misunderstanding of the legal principles and misunderstanding of the acceptance of bribe from C, and acceptance of bribe from a third party, ① The duties of selecting a subcontractor of W Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “W”) are not the Defendant’s duties, and the Defendant did not exercise influence over the conclusion of the subcontract agreement between W and C, and thus, do not relate to C’s duties of money and valuables provided by C and the Defendant.

② The amount of money at least 1,7 million won in the daily list of the crimes listed in the judgment of the original court (hereinafter “V”) shall not be considered as a bribe since C pays a monetary debt of KRW 17 million to the Defendant [2,00,000,000 in the rental equipment purchase price sold to C, Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “V”) and KRW 15,00,00 in the rental equipment purchase price sold to C] under the pretext of paying the Defendant’s monetary debt of KRW 17,00 in the daily list of crimes listed in the judgment of the original court.

③ On July 11, 2015, the Defendant, as shown in the judgment below, did not drink C, AS, and alcohol in the studio of “AP” located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Seoul on July 11, 2015, as in the daily list of crimes attached to the judgment below. At the same time, the Defendant was in a dust.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the legal principles that found all of the facts charged.

2) The acceptance of bribe from D and E: ① the Defendant did not have the right to exercise influence on the selection of W as a manager; the Defendant did not have any mitigated standard for tallying “X project”; and the result of the said project was conducted by an external institution; thus, the Defendant could not provide convenience for tallying.

In light of these points, there is no relation between the money received from D and E and the defendant's duties.

② The Defendant received from D and E KRW 500,000 as gift certificates of KRW 2,00,00 in the attached list of crimes indicated in the judgment below.