Do 2018 2976 A. Violation of Public Official Election Act

B. Violation of the Political Funds Act

C. Violation of the Local Public Officials Act

(d) Acceptance of a bribe;

(e) Offering a bribe;

1. (a) b. (c) d. A;

2. B

3. b. E. C.

Defendant 1, 2, and Prosecutor (Defendant 1, 3)

FT (for Defendant 1), a legal entity (with limited liability)

Attorney FU, FV, FW, F. F

FX (for Defendant 1) a legal entity

Attorney in charge, FY, FZ, GA, GB, GC, GD, GE, GF, GG, H, GI

J (for Defendant 2), a legal entity

Attorney in charge L, GJ, GK

Seoul High Court Decision 2017-2602 decided February 2, 2018

April 26, 2018

all appeals shall be dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are determined.

1. Examining the reasoning for Defendant A’s appeal in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly adopted as to the grounds of the original judgment, it is reasonable to determine that Defendant A’s appeal of this case against Defendant A constitutes a conviction of each of the two or more copies of the facts charged in the instant indictment against Defendant A for the same reason as indicated in the judgment of the lower court, and that each of the two or more copies of the facts charged against Defendant A was found guilty. In this context, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on the degree of proof required for a criminal trial, the degree of judgment of bribe in the instant indictment, etc., as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of Defendant B’s appeal in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly adopted, it is reasonable to maintain the judgment of the court of first instance that held that the instant public prosecution against Defendant B against Defendant B is recognized as guilty on the grounds as stated in the judgment of the court below on the grounds as stated in the judgment of the court below. It is reasonable to maintain the judgment of the court of first instance. In this regard, as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors of misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of receiving political funds or of misunderstanding the legal principles on the crime of receiving political funds, by violating the legal principles on the logic and experience, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

3. As to the grounds of appeal by the public prosecutor

For the same reasons as the decision of the court below, the court below acquitted all of the public prosecutions of this case on the ground that there is no proof of crime as to ① violation of the Political Funds Act against Defendant A and violation of the Local Public Officials Act, ② violation of the Public Official Election Act, ② giving and receiving of bribe due to giving and receiving of KRW 10 million in banks and cash, ② giving and receiving of bribe due to Defendant C’s non-defluence and cash delivery of KRW 10 million. In light of the records, the court below’s aforementioned determination of the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles of logic and experience as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Jung-hwa

Justices Kim Shin-chul

Justices Park Sang-ok

Justices Lee Ki-taik