The defendant shall be innocent.

The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is a police officer in charge of instruction and control over the public morals trading offender in Seoul discharged from Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency B (hereinafter “B”) from June 1, 2006 to February 29, 2008, and that is a police officer in charge of instruction and control over the public morals trading offender in Seoul discharged from Seoul. On February 18, 2013, the Defendant is a police officer assigned to the police station of the same National Police Agency as a police officer

On April 207, the Defendant, along with D, E, F, G (hereinafter the above four persons, referred to as D, etc., and including the Defendant, referred to as the “control Team”) who is a police officer of the same level, conspired to jointly accept money and valuables under the pretext of business, such as provision of control information and crackdown, from business owners, such as entertainment bars in the jurisdiction, and distribute them among the Control Team.

Accordingly, D received KRW 10 million on behalf of the control team in response to a request for enforcement information, enforcement period, and horse, etc. from an employerJ in Gangnam-gu Seoul, which operated the said entertainment tavern in front of the entertainment drinking house located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, and was engaged in illegal business, such as sexual traffic, and received KRW 10 million on behalf of the control team at around the end of April 2007. The Defendant received KRW 10 million out of the above KRW 10 million from D in the above Bosch Rexton vehicle after being aware of the fact that it was a bribe, and received KRW 65 million in total over 12 times, such as the list of crimes in attached Form D, together with D, etc. from around that time to early February 208.

Accordingly, the defendant, in collusion with D, received a bribe in relation to his duties.

Judgment

In a criminal trial, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving the facts charged, and the conviction shall be based on the evidence of probative value, which makes it possible for the judge to have the authenticity of the facts charged to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, so if there is no such evidence, the defendant is suspected to be guilty.