The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In a case where the defendant, who was selected as the accepter in the crime of bribery, denies the fact of the acceptance of the bribe at the time of the acceptance of the bribe, and there is no evidence such as financial data to support it, the defendant's statement alone must not only have the admissibility of evidence but also have credibility excluding a reasonable doubt. In determining the credibility of the statement, it is also necessary to examine not only the rationality, objective reasonableness, and consistency of the contents of the statement itself, but also its human nature, and the existence of interests derived from the statement.

(2) The lower court found the Defendant guilty on the ground that, in full view of all the circumstances, the Defendant’s statement that the Defendant sent KRW 30,000,000 to the Defendant’s house to the Defendant’s wife as well as R is consistent and detailed in the main part of the M’s statement that the Defendant sent KRW 30,000,000,000 to the Defendant’s wife, along with R, after the Plaintiff’s attorney-at-law case became final and conclusive, received a request for permission to change the design of the instant parking building from M, and delivered it to the Defendant with the Defendant under the direction of the Defendant, but the Defendant sent it to M, with the number of shares converted into cash, and the Defendant returned the number of shares to M, and stated that the Defendant transferred the Defendant’s oral statement to M, which corresponds to the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court affirmed the Defendant’s credibility in relation to the Defendant’s duties.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the aforementioned legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, logical and empirical rules.