In the middle of an inclusive 1 crime, if the amendment of the Act is made, whether the Act shall be applied.

Where a public official receives money or entertainment repeatedly from the same victims on three occasions under the pretext of solicitation for a case paid by a public official, it shall be deemed a single comprehensive crime, and where there is an amendment of statutes in the middle of a comprehensive one crime, it shall be applied only to the new law without any need to compare the punishment of the new and old law.

Subparagraph 1 of Article 78 of the Attorney-at-Law Act

November 23, 1971, 71Do1548 decided Nov. 23, 1971 (Article 254(34) of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1431, 19910, 193-47)

Defendant

Defendant

Busan District Court (83 High Court Decision 5085)

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

One hundred days out of the detention days prior to the pronouncement of the judgment below shall be included in the above sentence.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date of the final judgment.

375,00 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

The summary of the grounds for appeal by the defendant is as follows: (a) as in the judgment of the court below, the defendant did not receive money and valuables equivalent to KRW 450,000 on three occasions under the pretext of the school expenses to be used in soliciting the victim to arrest the non-indicted 1 who was accused by the victim; (b) as in the judgment of the court below, 50,000 won was paid to the police officer in charge of the case; and (c) at the time of the judgment of the court below, 30,000 won was paid to the victim's application for provisional seizure of corporeal movables; and (d) at the time of the judgment of the court below, 30,000 won was paid to the above victim's attorney fee for the lawsuit for delivery of movables; and (e) the defendant received entertainment as in the judgment of the court below at the request of the non-indicted 2, and even if the defendant was found guilty of facts violating the rules of evidence; and (e) the defendant did not agree with the judgment below after the judgment of the court below.

Article 54 of the former Attorney-at-Law Act (Law No. 2654, Dec. 20, 1973) shall apply Article 54 of the former Attorney-at-Law Act (Law No. 2654, Dec. 20, 197) as to the facts in the judgment of the court below as to the grounds for appeal by the defendant. Article 78 subparagraph 1 of the current Attorney-at-law Act shall apply to the facts in the judgment of the court below 2, and Article 78 of the former Attorney-at-law Act shall apply to the facts in the judgment of the court below. In analyzing the facts in the judgment of the court below 1, 2, and 3, the defendant was arrested by the police officer in charge of the non-indicted 1 who was accused by the defendant 2, 3, upon request of the police officer in charge of the same person, and the defendant received money and entertainment over three occasions on the basis of the same kind of crime, and thus, the court below's judgment shall not be exempted from the whole amendment of the Act.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following judgment is rendered as follows.

The criminal facts recognized by a member and the evidence are the same as that of the statement of the court below, except for the case where the statement of the defendant in this court is admitted as evidence, and they are cited by Article 369 of the same Act.

Article 78 (1) 1 of the Attorney-at-Law Act provides that each part of the judgment of the court below 1, 2, 3 shall be included in the so-called judgment of the defendant in the law, and Article 78 (1) of the Attorney-at-Law Act provides that each part of the judgment 4 shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for each of the prescribed amounts, since the above crimes are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, since Article 38 (1) 2 and Article 50 of the Criminal Act provides that the above crimes shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than one year within the range of competition with the punishment prescribed for the first crime under Article 38 (1) 1 of the same Act, and Article 57 of the same Act provides that the defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than 110 days from the number of detention days before the sentence of the court below is detained after the crime, and there are extenuating circumstances such as that the defendant's depth was divided with the victim after the crime.

It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Kim-chul (Presiding Judge)