|
[1] The meaning of ""official duties"" in regard to the crime of acceptance of a bribe, and criteria to determine whether a specific action falls under the duties of a public official
[2] In a case where a public official affiliated to the former Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries received money from the CEO of the shipping company Gap which was provided for the purpose of obtaining approval of operation permits of ships for ships of Chinese registry, the Court affirmed the court below's decision that the defendant's actions could not be seen as actions connected with his duties and thus the crime of acceptance of bribe cannot be established
[3] Whether, in regard to the crime of acceptance of a bribe, the amount of the bribe accepted is an issue requiring strict scrutiny (affirmative), and whether a speculated amount can be confiscated in cases where the amount of the bribe cannot be specified (negative)
[4] In a case where the defendant, a public officer of the formerly named as Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, received money from the current and former CEOs of the shipping company Gap, for ""obtaining approval of operation permits of ships for the Gap's ships of Chinese registry,"" which bore no connection to the defendant's duties, and for ""facilitating Gap's business operations,"" which was connected to the defendant's duties, the case holding that the court below committed errors in law through misapprehension of legal principles and failure to conduct all necessary investigations when it speculated the amount of bribes received in connection with the defendant's duties based on a groundless apportionment
|
