A bribery case involving a public official responsible for private-contract work at Iksan City Hall, North Jeolla Province, has been finalized by the Supreme Court.
The sentence is 2 years in prison, a fine of 3 thousand ten-thousand won, and approximately 1 thousand 265 ten-thousand won in additional collection.
However, the act of having a vehicle moved during the search and seizure was not punished as a separate charge of instigating evidence concealment.
3-Line Summary
1. The bribery for solicitations involving private contracts was finally found guilty.
2. The sentence of 2 years in prison and a fine of 3 thousand ten-thousand won was finalized.
3. Moving the vehicle resulted in an acquittal on instigating evidence concealment.
The Final Sentence for the Official Responsible for Private Contracts
According to the Law Times, the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division 1 dismissed the appeal by former Iksan City Hall Accounting Division head A on September 3, 2026, thereby affirming the lower court ruling on the charges including bribery receipt. The finalized sentence is 2 years in prison, a fine of 3 thousand ten-thousand won, and approximately 1 thousand 265 ten-thousand won in additional collection.
A was indicted on allegations of receiving cash and gift certificates, as well as meals and golf entertainment, from individuals connected to companies while handling private-contract work at Iksan City Hall. Yonhap News reported that the core of the case involved solicitations to concentrate private contracts for sign-maintenance projects with a particular company, along with the receipt of money and valuables.
The first trial sentenced A to 1 year in prison and a fine of 2 thousand ten-thousand won, but the appellate court reached different conclusions on some charges and increased the sentence to 2 years in prison and a fine of 3 thousand ten-thousand won. The Supreme Court found no error in the application of law in the appellate court’s ruling.
The important point in this decision is that the charge of the official responsible for contract work receiving money and valuables along with solicitations was finally found guilty. The appellate court found that the receipt of such benefits over approximately 4 years undermined trust in the fairness of local-government operations.
Why Was the Order to Move the Vehicle Acquitted?
The case also included the act of having a vehicle moved during the search and seizure. When police searched Iksan City Hall offices and A’s vehicle in July 2025, investigators found that A had left a vehicle key, a family contact number, and a note instructing that the vehicle be removed on a subordinate employee’s desk. The vehicle was moved, and the items inside were also removed.
However, the appellate court found this part to constitute an acquittal on the charge of instigating evidence concealment, and the Supreme Court finalized that conclusion. According to the Law Times report, the fact that the vehicle and items had been moved was immediately revealed at the scene, and the police were also able to secure them without difficulty were taken into consideration.
The focus of the decision was not merely the fact that A attempted to move the vehicle. The issue was whether the act caused, or risked causing, a serious obstacle to the investigation and the operation of criminal justice. The court found it difficult to view the circumstances alone as an abuse of the right of defense extending beyond the scope of concealing one’s own evidence.
Therefore, this ruling does not mean that the bribery charge was acquitted. The conviction and sentence for bribery were finalized, while only the separate charge applied to the instruction to move the vehicle was found not guilty. The ruling shows that, even within a single case, the requirements for establishing each charge and the assessment of evidence may differ.
References
Tags #Bribery #BriberyReceipt #IksanCityHall #PrivateContracts #SupremeCourtRuling #2YearsInPrison #OfficialCrimes #InstigatingEvidenceConcealment #SearchAndSeizure #LocalGovernment #OfficialBribery #CourtRuling