All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the Defendant’s grounds of appeal (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed)

A. In the crime of bribery, the term “interest” includes not only money, goods, and other property interest, but also all tangible and intangible interests sufficient to satisfy human needs (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Do3539, Nov. 26, 2002). The offered cannot be deemed as satisfying sexual needs.

In addition, the crime of bribery is also protected by the law of the process of performing the duties of the public official, trust in the society, and the uncertainty of the act of performing his duties, and there is no special solicitation to recognize the bribe of the received money and valuables, since it does not require any solicitation or unlawful act related to his duties.

In addition, money and valuables are received in relation to his/her duties, and there is no need for an individual job act or a quid pro quo relationship. When a public official receives money and valuables or other benefits from a person subject to his/her duties, it shall not be deemed that there is no relation to his/her duties unless there are special circumstances, such as where it is deemed that it is merely an equivalent price in light of social norms, or where it is clearly recognized that it is due to an individual pro rata relationship and needs for the decentralization. In cases where a public official received money and valuables in relation to his/her duties, it shall not be deemed that there

Even if the received money and valuables constitute a bribe (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do3579, Oct. 12, 2001). On the other hand, whether a certain profit gained by a public official constitutes an unfair profit with a quid pro quo relationship, and whether there exists a special private relationship between the relevant public official and the provider of benefits, and both parties.