No person shall damage or remove posters and other propaganda facilities installed under the Election of Public Officials Act without any justifiable reason.

Nevertheless, the Defendants discovered the way along with the opening, and conspired to remove them without any reason, and conspired to remove them on the street. On April 8, 2016, at the third permanent permanent head of Pyeongtaek-si located in Pyeongtaek-si Dong-dong on April 12:30, 2016, and at the 20th permanent head of Pyeongtaek-si Election Commission established at the seat of the committee on the management of Pyeongtaek-si election, the election posters, including the photograph and brief personal history of candidates for the election district of Pyeongtaek-si in the 20th presidential election, were removed and left on the street by the Defendants, respectively.

As a result, Defendants conspired to damage posters installed by the Public Official Election Act without any justifiable reason.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report internal investigation (in the field, investigation-verification of black stuffs, verification of images, and closures)

1. The Defendants: Article 240 (1) of the Act on the Election of Public Officials and Article 30 of the Criminal Act;

1. The Defendants to be suspended from sentence: 500,000 won per fine;

1. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) (one hundred thousand won per day) of the Criminal Act;

1. The Defendants: (a) the Defendants: (b) the reasons for sentencing under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act recognize the Defendants’ mistake; (c) Defendant C is the first offender without any previous conviction; (d) Defendant A and B are only one-time criminal offenses; and (e) the Defendants do not seem to have any intent to interfere with the election of public officials due to any contingent crime committed during the commission of the instant crime; and (d) the effect of the election on the grounds of the instant crime appears to be insufficient; and (e) other factors of sentencing as indicated in the instant records and theories, such as the Defendants’ age, sex, sex, family relationship, family environment, motive and means of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be determined as per the disposition.