All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

B The total amount of KRW 51 million received from the end of 2008 to the end of 2009 A with respect to the receipt and payment of each money listed in Nos. 1 through 5 in the table of crime committed in the judgment of the court below is not a referral for the duties of public officials.

The judgment below

The amount equivalent to KRW 120 million, which the defendant received from X on October 14, 2009 with respect to receipt of KRW 120 million as stated in No. 6 of the crime sight table No. 120,000,000, which he received from V through X on October 14, 2009, is paid as compensation for the service (supervision, design change work) provided to V by the defendant, or is not received as good offices for public officials' duties.

The Defendant received KRW 120 million from X, but returned KRW 10 million from X, i.e., from X to X, so the Defendant’s additional collection amount should be KRW 110 million.

The punishment sentenced by the court below on unreasonable sentencing (the imprisonment of one year and six months, the fine of 80 million won, the additional collection of 171 million won) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

C The punishment sentenced by the court below (limited to four years of imprisonment, fine of 80 million won, additional collection of 80 million won) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

A The punishment sentenced by the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment, fine of 20 million won, additional collection of 65 million won) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

In light of the fact that the statement of Q Q, which issued a mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, is inconsistent with the statement of AK by the company company present at the time of eating in the daily restaurant, as well as inconsistent with the statement of the company company AK on the packing form of money, the situation at the time of eating in the daily restaurant, and is not consistent with the developments leading up to raising the bribe fund, and there is no motive to give a bribe to the defendant, and there is no possibility that Q Q Q would have sent a delivery accident, etc., the facts charged that the defendant received cash of KRW 10 million from A Q cannot be deemed to have been proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, and thus, the defendant should be acquitted.

One year of imprisonment sentenced by the court below of unfair sentencing.