In the crime of mediation acceptance, where a public official falls under “using his/her status.”

In the crime of mediation and bribery under Article 132 of the Criminal Code, the term "public official's taking advantage of his/her status" means a case where he/she uses a private relationship, such as friendship or kinship, or simply uses a public official's status. However, if a public official who can legally or actually influence the business process handled by another public official uses his/her status, it constitutes a case where he/she uses his/her status, and it does not necessarily require him/her to work in the same department.

Article 132 of the Criminal Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant] 1190 decided July 23, 1991 (Gong1991, 2278) 92Do532 decided May 8, 1992 (Gong1992, 1920) 93Do1056 decided July 13, 1993 (Gong193Ha, 231)

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Lee Jong-sung

Seoul High Court Decision 93No2705 delivered on February 18, 1994

The appeal is dismissed.

Defendant’s defense counsel’s grounds of appeal

In the crime of mediation and bribery under Article 132 of the Criminal Act, the term "public official" shall not be deemed to fall under the case where he uses a private relationship, such as friendship and kinship, or simply uses a public official's status. However, if a public official who can legally or actually influence another public official's business affairs handled by him uses his status, it constitutes a case where he uses his status, and it does not necessarily require him to work in such a department (see Supreme Court Decision 93Do1056 delivered on July 13, 1993). Thus, as determined by the court below, the defendant, as determined by the court below, was the first head of the first tax office at the time when the third real estate investigation officer of the property state of the second regional tax office was working, and the defendant was the second head of the first tax office at the time of the above regional tax office at the time of the above case, he can be recognized to have a de facto influence over the duties of the above Kim Jong-chul in charge of tax investigation related to the transfer income tax in this case.

Party members asserted in the theory of a lawsuit are inappropriate to invoke the instant case, unlike the instant case. There is no reason for the argument.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Cho Chang-tae (Presiding Justice)