The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding of legal principles or misunderstanding of legal principles, the Defendant paid KRW 23,390,000, out of KRW 268,783,950, which was paid by G to H, as intermediary fees, and the Defendant did not actually have accrued any profit to the Defendant. Therefore, the amount should be excluded from additional collection.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (two years of imprisonment, additional collection) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles 1) The purpose of the relevant legal principles is to deprive the offender of the pertinent property acquired by the offender and prevent the offender from possessing unlawful profits. As such, in a case where the person receives money and other valuables as a bribe in relation to the solicitation or delivers part of the money and other valuables to the other intermediary in accordance with the purport of actually receiving the money and other valuables, the benefits of the money and other valuables do not belong to the offender, and thus, only the remaining money and valuables should be confiscated or collected additionally. However, even if a person who received money and other valuables in relation to the referral of matters belonging to a public official's duties delivers part of the money and other valuables as a solicitation to another intermediary, the money and other valuables are expected to be used as such from the time when the money and other valuables were originally received to be used as such, and if the criminal used as an independent expense in accordance with his/her own judgment, if it is merely a method of consuming the money and other valuables.

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Do963 delivered on May 11, 1999) Ghana gives a bribe to a teacher who is not a joint recipient or a subordinate offender.