A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

10,000,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

Of the facts charged in the instant case.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, from July 1, 2006 to June 25, 2010, has overall control over the overall affairs, such as personnel management, as the C Si market.

On July 16, 2008, from July 25, 2008 to July 25, 2008, the Defendant received KRW 10 million in return for promotion of the officer from F who was ordered to act as a proxy for the head of C/Si Public Health Center on July 14, 2008.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of statutes to the F of each protocol of examination of suspect to prosecution;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 129 (1) of the Criminal Act selecting a penalty;

1. Reasons for sentencing under the latter part of Article 134 of the Criminal Act [the scope of punishment by a penalty] [the scope of punishment by a penalty] 5 years or less (the basic area of punishment by a recommendation] - 1 year of imprisonment with prison labor - 3 years [general prison prisons] general mitigation factors: In cases where duties are highly related, public officials of Grade III or higher (the grounds for suspension of execution of punishment) in cases where duties are highly related;

1. Grounds for major participation: A significant dogbition;

2. Reasons for general reference;

(a) positive: Faithful service or criminal punishment for a long time;

(b) negative: Public officials of Grade III or higher in rank;

3. Selection of sentence: Since the above-mentioned reasons are not both criteria for the suspension of execution and recommendation of sentence, the crime of this case is deemed to be a comprehensive comparison and evaluation (decision of sentence). The crime of this case, when the defendant is in office as the head of a local government with substantial and final personnel authority over the public officials under his jurisdiction and received a bribe in connection with the promotion of the public officials under his jurisdiction, and thus, the crime of this case cannot be deemed to be less severe. Accordingly, it harms the integrity and fairness of the public officials' integrity and fairness, which are one of the most important virtue of the public officials' society, and the C City public officials and C citizens' trust on the integrity and fairness of the public officials' society, and it is also likely to be biased due

Furthermore, the defendant.