Defendant

All parts of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A, B, D, and E shall be reversed.

Defendant

A. Defendant .

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: B. 40 million won; B. 20 million won (the aggregate of KRW 150 million from September 31, 2014 to January 21, 2015; B. 150 million from March 3, 2017; B. 150 million won from March 6, 2017; B. 205 million won from September 30, 2014 to September 24, 2015; B. 150 million won from September 30, 2014 to March 3, 2015; B. 1. 50 million won from September 30, 2014 to March 3, 2015; B. 205 billion won from the aggregate of KRW 150 million from September 30, 2014 to KRW 50 million from May 16, 2016 to 208.

A. Defendants A, C, and D (unfair sentencing) committed by the lower court against the said Defendants (A: 6 years of imprisonment; 463,756,00 won of fine; C: one year of imprisonment; and 10 months of imprisonment) are too unreasonable.

2) In the misunderstanding of the legal principles and misapprehension of the legal principles on Defendant B’s mistake of facts: (a) Defendant A’s attack part against Defendant A (2017 Highly 97) did not pay KRW 100 million to Defendant B upon the defective declaration of intent following Defendant B’s public conflict.

Defendant

There is no relation between B's speech and Defendant A's act of disposal.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

Fact-misunderstanding: 150 million won (2017 senior 127) of a bribe granted to Defendant E (2017 senior 2017 senior 127) Defendant B lending this part to Defendant E or lending it to Defendant E as a bribe.

The amount equivalent to the financial interest of the loan can be considered as a bribe, 15.5.00