The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Defendant

A.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The public prosecutor (defendant B) committed a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes) provides that "when an executive or employee of a financial institution promises money, valuables or other benefits in connection with his/her duties," and therefore, whether an executive or employee of a financial institution who has promised to give a benefit in relation

Therefore, if Defendant B proposed to issue a true payment guarantee certificate from K and Defendant A and accepted the issuance thereof, it can be deemed that Defendant B promised to receive money and valuables from K with the consent to the proposal. Thus, the crime of acceptance constitutes a crime of acceptance. Whether a true payment guarantee certificate was issued after it was issued, whether a forged payment guarantee certificate was issued after the crime is merely an circumstance after the crime and thus does not affect the establishment of the crime.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted Defendant B of the facts charged on the ground that it is difficult to deem that Defendant B had expressed an intention of consent that can be seen as a conclusive agreement with regard to the proposal by Defendant K merely because it issued a forged payment guarantee certificate.

B. The sentencing of the lower court (two years of suspended sentence in October) on the ground that the sentence of unfair sentencing is too uneasible.

2. We examine ex officio the judgment of the court below on the Defendant A’s assertion of unfair sentencing on this part of the judgment of the court below.

가. 2011년 8월경 지급보증서 위조 및 행사 부분에 대한 판단 ⑴ 이 부분 공소사실의 요지 ㈎ 피고인은 2011. 8. 10. 대전 유성구 I에 있는 빌라 303호 월세방에서, 그곳에 있는 컴퓨터를 이용하여 '국민은행 F지점...