All
| TITLE | Supreme Court Decision 2017Do12389 September 24, 2020 【Bribery; Acceptance of Bribe】 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
|
[1] Method of identifying a bribe offeror in the crime of bribery, and whether money and valuables or pecuniary profits ought to be directly provided by the offeror and accepted by the offeree (negative) [2] In the case where: (a) Defendant A, a civil servant, consented to Defendant B’s proposition (“If you need to give a gift to someone, I will send salted shrimp to that person,”) and sent a list of names to whom he wanted to send salted shrimp to Defendant B; (b) Defendant A was indicted on the charge of having instigated Defendant B send out salted shrimp in delivery packages to the designated people, by writing Defendant A’s name on the sender line, as if Defendant A himself was the one who sent out the gift, and not paying the price, thereby having received a bribe; and (c) Defendant B was indicted on the charge of offering a bribe to Defendant A, the case holding that Defendant A’s intention of taking possession was fulfilled by Defendant B’s provision of salted shrimp, thus establishing the crime of offering and accepting a bribe under Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act, and that the establishment of the crime is not influenced by the sole circumstance that the offeror and offeree did not directly provide and accept the money and valuables in question |
|
