The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10 million.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The Defendant received KRW 50 million from J on the ground that he would have the relevant public officials reduced capital gains tax in return for tax agency services. Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the Defendant was guilty of the instant facts charged based on the confession and the prosecutor’s statement without credibility of the Defendant’s confession and without credibility. 2) Even if the Defendant stated the same statement as the facts constituting the facts stated in the judgment of the lower court for the purpose of the instant case, it was erroneous in the lower judgment.

Even if such circumstance alone makes it difficult to view the Defendant as a normal activity as a tax specialist, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant received money or valuables under the pretext of transferring the intent of the J’s solicitation to a tax official. Therefore, it cannot be deemed as irrelevant to the status and scope of duties of a tax accountant.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles that the defendant's act constitutes a violation of Article 111 (1) of the Attorney-at-Law Act.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one hundred months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution, additional collection of KRW 50 million) is too unreasonable.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal doctrine and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the trial court, the lower court’s conclusion that found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged is justifiable, and there was no error by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the crime of violating Article 111(1) of the Attorney-at-Law

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

1) The court’s statement that conforms to the facts charged in the instant case is reliable in light of the following circumstances. (A) The circumstances supporting the content of the court’s statement and the credibility of its statement (1).