The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the court below (as to the part concerning the crime of oil) is too unreasonable. The punishment imposed by the defendant (as to six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, additional collection of 14 million won) is too unreasonable.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as the victim's statement, etc. (as to the acquittal portion), the fact that the defendant received 14 million won from the victim as a solicitation fee or entertainment expense even though the defendant did not have any intent or ability to solicit the promotion of E from F, can be fully recognized.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the defendant and prosecutor prior to the determination of ex officio.

Of the facts charged in this case concerning frauds in the trial of the prosecutor, “However, the defendant did not have an intention or ability to promote the above E even if he received the money in the name of school expenses or entertainment expenses from the victim.” The defendant, however, had no intention to use the money in the name of school expenses or entertainment expenses from the victim as expenses for the solicitation of promotion of the above E, and requested F to amend the bill of amendment to the contents that the defendant did not have an intention or ability to use it as expenses for the solicitation of promotion of the above E. In response to his employment, the defendant requested F to change the contents that he would not have an intention or ability to promote the above E. The decision of the court below was no longer maintained because it was changed

3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing and the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

【Discretionary Judgment] Summary of Criminal facts and Evidence is recognized by this Court.