The judgment below

In 2014, the part of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes(EMs) and the year 2015.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court was justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (e.g., al., 2015) among the facts charged in the instant case on or around February 2015. In so doing, contrary to the Defendant’s grounds of appeal, the lower court did not exhaust all necessary deliberations, and did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of

Meanwhile, the lower court’s assertion that the part on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the known player) in the first half of the year 2014 was erroneous in violation of the principle of trial by evidence, and violation of the rule of evidence and the presumption of innocence was alleged only in the grounds of appeal that the Defendant used it as the ground of appeal or did not consider it as the object of judgment ex officio, and thus, does not constitute a legitimate appeal. In addition, even if examining the above, the lower court

In addition, the argument that the lower court’s determination of sentencing erred in the deliberation of the basic facts for sentencing is ultimately an unfair argument in sentencing.

Therefore, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal is permitted for the wrongful grounds for sentencing. As such, the argument that the determination of a sentence is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a minor sentence has been imposed against the defendant.

2. Regarding the prosecutor's grounds for appeal

A. The lower court on the part of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery) is merely the Defendant’s receipt of money and lelebs, in return for soliciting solicitation from I to the competent full bench in connection with a collection-related gold lawsuit, and the Defendant is the primary stock company.