beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.
Defendant
B shall be punished by imprisonment for six months and by a fine of fifty thousand won.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (as to the offering of a bribe), Defendant lent five million won to B without compensation does not have any relation to B’s duty and payment, and Defendant did not have any relation to B’s illegal disposal.
Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and misapprehending the relevant legal principles in finding the facts charged of giving a bribe.
2) The lower court’s improper sentencing is too unreasonable.
B. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable.
Defendant
B at the first trial date, the first trial withdrawn the assertion of mistake of facts during the reasons for appeal and left only the unfair argument of sentencing.
(c)
The lower court’s sentencing against Defendant A is too uncomfortable and unfair.
2. Determination
A. The prosecutor made an application for permission to amend an indictment to change “194,917 Won” from among the facts charged against Defendant B to “34,931 Won” in the judgment ex officio (the part on Defendant B) at this court. Since this court permitted this, the part on Defendant B among the judgment below cannot be maintained any longer.
B. The lower court’s determination on Defendant A’s assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine was 1) In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted by the lower court, the Defendant’s gratuitous lending of KRW 5 million to B who investigates the case of his own person to the person under investigation was conducted in relation to the cost for the convenience of investigation, and the Defendant was well aware that such transaction was related to police duties.
For the reason that it is reasonable to see that the defendant was guilty of giving a bribe to the defendant.
1. B is a police officer in charge of the investigation of the theft of the defendant, and the additional investigation of the defendant was possible according to the investigation intent of B, and the defendant's disposition also affects the defendant's disposition.