The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months and by imprisonment for one year and two months, respectively.

(b).

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

A misunderstanding of facts (as to the facts charged in paragraph (1) of this Article among the facts charged in paragraph (2) of this Article), Defendant A received money from the victim as a solicitation for public officials, in the name of the expenses related to authorization and permission, land price, and service price, in relation to obtaining permission for the collection of earth and rocks in the Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) from the victim, or in the name of KRW 150 million.

In addition, Defendant A received KRW 150 million from the authorization and permission cost, design cost, contract deposit for the instant land sale and purchase, and resident consent cost for the instant land. After receiving the money, Defendant A’s service related to the collection of earth and rocks produced in the construction process by collecting earth and rocks through an application for new construction of the Youth Training Center under the agreement with the victim. Thus, Defendant A did not have obtained money by deceiving the victim as stated in this part of the facts charged.

Even if the conviction is recognized, the total amount of KRW 85 million, such as design service cost, land purchase contract amount, etc. paid by Defendant A, should be excluded from the subject of additional collection.

The sentence of unfair sentencing (total) by the court below (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

As to the facts charged in paragraph (1) of this Article, Defendant B did not receive KRW 150 million for the purpose of deceiving the victim or soliciting public officials in collusion with Defendant A, in collusion, with regard to the facts charged in paragraph (1) of this Article, from among misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

As to the facts charged of Paragraph 2 of Article 2014 Highest 387, Defendant B received business earnings from the earth and stone collection projects in the future in the first place of the land in this case, and did not receive business revenues from the earth and stone collection projects from public officials for permission to collect earth and stone.

The sentence of unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.