In Article 132 of the Criminal Code, the term “public official’s taking advantage of his position” means at least a public official who deals with the relevant duties, and at least a position which is able to legally or factually or indirectly prevent and exert any influence with respect to his duties.

Defendant 1 and one other defense counsel are attorneys Lee Jung-soo and Kim Jong-soo.

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 65No1450 delivered on February 17, 1966

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The case is remanded to the Panel Division of the Seoul Criminal Court.

The Defendants’ defense counsel Kim Jong-soo’s grounds of appeal No. 1 and No. 1 of the Grounds of Appeal No. 1 are also determined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, Defendant 1 was appointed and held as the head of the tourism service division of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City on or around 1963. From 1963 to 200 won, he was transferred to the 1st five-year tourist destination office of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Planning and Coordination Office, and he was granted a license for the construction site drawings and specifications to the Minister of Construction and Transportation through the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor Mayor or the Mayor of Busan Metropolitan City, or 200 won, and if he was granted a license for the said construction site drawings and specifications, he shall obtain a license for the said Minister from 40,000 won to 50,000 won from 10,000 won from 20,0000 won from 30,000 won from 40,000 won from 14,000 won from 5,000 won from 10,0000 won from 3,000,0000 won from 14,00.

However, Article 132 of the Criminal Act stipulates the requirements for establishing a bribe to which a public official demands or promises to arrange matters belonging to the duties of other public officials by taking advantage of his status. The meaning of "public official taking advantage of his status" in the establishment requirements is difficult to be viewed as the subject of this crime even though there is no relation with other public officials who handle the relevant duties, regardless of the type and position of the public official. It is reasonable to interpret that at least a public official who directly or indirectly deals with the relevant duties can be the subject of the offense (see Supreme Court Decision 68Do1303, Dec. 17, 1968). Since the status of Defendant 1 at the time of this point is an examination and analysis officer of the planning and coordination office, it is only the examination and evaluation of corrective policy-making and planning-making, and since there is no relation between the Minister of Construction and Transportation and the public official under his jurisdiction and the Seoul High Court's permission to accept the bribe from the public official under his jurisdiction (see Supreme Court Decision 201Do1303, Dec. 17, 1968).

Therefore, according to the unanimous opinion of all participating Justices, the decision on the remaining grounds of appeal is omitted, and the case is reversed and remanded to the Panel Division of the Seoul District Criminal Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by Article 391 and Article 397 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Justices Song Dong-dong et al. (Presiding Justice)