(b) Violation of the Political Parties Act;

2. A. Kim * Professor, professor

3. (a) 00 Transmitt. 50 Roster

4. (a) GabO, FO

5.(a) A. 00, Agriculture

00, Kim* * For A)

Daejeon General Law Firm, Attorneys Lee - Promotion (Defendant Song-soo0, Park 00, Cho 100

for the purposes of this section)

A fine of 2,00,000 won, defendant Kim* A* A fine of 3,00,000, 000 won, and defendant Song 00

A fine of KRW 5,00,000, Defendant Park 00, and Article 00 shall be punished by respective fines of KRW 2,00,000, and KRW 00.

The period calculated by converting 50,000 won into one day when the defendants did not pay the above fines;

Defendants are confined in a workhouse.

The provisional payment of the amount equivalent to the above fine shall be ordered.

Defendant KimO is a person who participated in the election district of the 19th National Assembly member provided with the election of the 19th National Assembly member and was elected as a candidate for the Cheongyang-gun (registration as a preliminary candidate on December 13, 201). Defendant Kim ** Defendant Kim 100 is a spouse of Defendant Kim 100. Defendant Song 00 is a senior secretary general of the division of the 19th National Assembly members movement branch of the 19th National Assembly and the 19th National Assembly members movement branch of the 19th National Assembly. Defendant Park 00 is a first-class line of the 19th National Youth Training Center, a member of the 00th National Youth Training Center, who was granted the 19th National Youth Training Center, as a member of the 19th National Youth Training Center, and the first-class line of the 19th National Assembly members of the 19th National Assembly members of the 19th National Assembly. Defendant Kim Jong-soo is an unfair council member conference granting the 100th National Assembly.

The head is the president of the Korea Federation of the same military agricultural managers.

[2012 Gohap32]

1. Violation of the restriction on contribution by Defendant Kim*, Song 00, and Park 00

A candidate for a National Assembly member (including a person who intends to become a candidate) and his/her spouse shall not make a contribution to any person in the constituency concerned or any person having relations with the electorate, even though such person is outside the constituency concerned, and a company, juristic person, organization, or its officer or employee related to the candidate shall not make any contribution in connection with the election for the candidate or the political party to which he/she belongs before the election period, and no person shall make, or have another make contribution to, the candidate (including the person who intends to become the candidate) or the political party to which he/she belongs, in connection with the election.

In addition, except as otherwise provided for in the Public Official Election Act, no election campaign shall be conducted by means of broadcasting, newspapers, news communications, magazines, other publications, campaign meetings, debate meetings, debate meetings, native folks meetings, alumni meetings, other assemblies, information and communications, the establishment of an election campaign organization or private organization, door-to-door visits, and other methods prior to the election campaign period.

In addition, no one may distribute, post, spread, screen, or display any advertisement, letter of personnel management, poster, poster, photograph, document, drawing, document, drawing, printed matter, recording or video recording tape or others similar thereto, which contains the contents supporting, recommending, or opposing a political party or candidate (including a person wishing to be a candidate), or which indicates the name of a political party or candidate's name, in order to influence the election from 180 days before the election day to the election day (hereinafter referred to as "the person who intends to be a candidate").

The same paragraph shall apply to paragraphs 4 through 7).

Nevertheless, Defendant Kim**, Song 00, Park O on December 2, 201, in collusion with Defendant Kim *, Park O on December 18, 201: around 00 to request the support of Defendant Kim 00 and to nine electorates, such as the maximum 00, and to provide meals equivalent to KRW 384,560, and to provide meals equivalent to KRW 384,560, as follows: Defendant Kim 00, under title 108, 00, 100 won (per right 12,00 won).

On the other hand, Defendant Kim*, Song 00, and Park O's books provided to the said nine electorates, were posted up to 2 pages of the above Kim 00 (the above Kim 00 photographs were posted in the position of the chairperson of Hanyang Council of Party Members, and the position of the chairperson of the Gyeyang Pream Campaign Headquarters) and were distributed together by the brochuress of the publicity campaign headquarters.

As a result, Defendant Kim*, Song 00, and Park O made a contribution for the above Kim 00, and at the same time distributed the above Kim 00 name cards in a way other than the normal way in order to influence the election of the 19th National Assembly members, and at the same time made an election campaign before the election campaign period. Defendant Kim ** and Song 00 violated the restriction on the contribution, etc.

Defendant Kim**, Song 00, in collusion, around December 12, 2011: around 00, Defendant Kim Jong-chul requested ten electorates, including the electorate, to provide the above Kim 100 support, and distributed the above Kim 120,00 won of the above Kim Ma Kim 00 above, without compensation. The above Kim Ma 120,00 won of the above Kim Ma Kim 120,00.

On the other hand, Defendant Kim*, and Song 00 offered to 10 persons, including the above electorates, the two pages of the above Kim Kim 00 (the above Kim O's photograph was printed on the position of the chairperson of Hanra, the position of the chairperson of the Cheongyang Council for party members, and the position of the chairperson of the Cheongyang-dong Headquarters) were displayed, and the publicity brochures of the Gyeyang Pream Campaign Headquarters were distributed together.

As a result, Defendant Kim*, and SongO conspired to make a contribution for the above Kim 00, and at the same time distributed the above Kim 00 name cards in a way other than ordinary way to influence the election of the 19th National Assembly members, and at the same time made an election campaign before the election campaign period.

3. Violation of the restriction on contribution by Defendant Kim 00

On November 21, 201, at around 00: 18:0, Defendant Kim 00 attended a meeting of accounts among the electorates, distributed to 9 electorates, such as the electorates, his photograph, major career, etc., by stating that “I am out of the election of National Assembly members, I am well asked,” and distributed the amount of KRW 9No 108,000 without compensation.

Accordingly, the above defendant carried out an election campaign before the election campaign period, and distributed his name cards in a way other than ordinary ways to influence the election of the 19th National Assembly members, and made a contribution act.

4. Violation, etc. of the restriction on contributions by Defendants Kim 00 and Cho 00

Defendant Kim - and Cho 00 conspireds on December 7, 201, 18:00 to 11 persons, including the name of his photograph, major career, etc., on the list of 11 persons, including the head of the Si/Eup/Myeon, to whom the Republic of Korea is granted, including the head of the Si/Gun, and the head of the Eup/Myeon branch of the Si/Eup/Myeon branch of the Si/Gun granted agricultural management association, including the head of the Gu (the head of the Gu) by visiting a meeting with the association of the granted agricultural management personnel, to make a statement to the effect that "the head of the Gu/Si/Eup/Myeon branch of the Gu," and "the head of the Gu/Si/Eup/Myeon branch of the Gu," and "the head of the Gu/Si/Gun," and the head of the Gu/Si/Eup/Myeon branch of the Gu, to the effect that "the election of the National Assembly members," and the head of the Gu/Si/Gun, provided the meals of 290 won.

Accordingly, the above Defendants conspired to make a contribution, carried out an election campaign before the election campaign period, and Defendant Kim 00 distributed his name cards in a way other than ordinary way in order to influence the election of the 19th National Assembly members.

5. Establishment of similar agencies of Defendant Kim 00 and Song 00

No one shall newly establish or install an election promotion committee, supporters' association, research institute, counseling center, rest area, or similar institution, organization, organization, or facility, regardless of the name thereof, for a candidate (including a person who intends to become a candidate) other than an election campaign office or election campaign liaison office.

Defendant Kim 00: (a) conspired to establish an election campaign headquarters on July 12, 201; (b) opened the assigned office; (c) published an advertisement under the bottom of the 21C newspaper at around August 18, 201 under the title of the 21st election campaign headquarters; (d) sent relevant text messages using the contact number of electorates for election campaign; and (e) distributed 00 name messages stating the position of the chairman of the said 1 and 2 as stated in the indictment; (c) the Defendants participated in the election campaign headquarters at all times to establish the 00 election campaign headquarters or to acknowledge the rest of the 21st election campaign headquarters, including the establishment of the 203rd election campaign headquarters, with the exception of the above 2nd election campaign headquarters; and (d) the Defendants conspired to open the 200th election campaign headquarters or to open the 20th election campaign headquarters at any time, which is an organization or a similar organization.

6. Violation of the Political Parties Act by Defendant Kim 00

Political Parties may establish a party members council for each local constituency for the National Assembly member and each autonomous Gu/Si/Gun, Eup/Myeon/Dong: Provided, That no person is allowed to establish an office of the party members council for the operation of subordinate organizations of the City/Do party. Nevertheless, Defendant KimO, on September 15, 201, appointed to the Chairman of the Council for Party Members of Hanyang-gun and Cheongyang-gun Council (the present new party, this sub-party, and this sub-party), following appointment of the Chairman of the Council for Party Members of Hanyang-si and Cheongyang-gun Council;

(a) have an office for the operation of the Council for Members as above at the office where the 145 p.m. 145 p.m. is located in the second floor of the Yari-Gu, Chungcheongnam-dong, Chungcheongnam-do;

B. On October 27, 201, at the Cheongyang-gun Eup/Myeon 196 - one of the Cheongyang-dong Cheongyang-dong Cheongyang-dong, Chungcheongnam-do, an office for the operation of the above party members council.

[Attachment 2012 Gohap60]

7. Violation, etc. of the restriction on contribution by Defendant Kim 00

On December 7, 2011: around 00, at the cafeteria, Defendant KimO stated that there are 30 or more persons, “the head of the watch group belonging to the Seowon-gun, the electorate,” and “the head of the watch group belonging to the Dong-gun,” the electorate, Defendant KimO: (a) made a statement about his personal guidance or support, and (b) made a statement about his personal guidance or support with the purport that “I will move to a member of the National Assembly,” and (c) 7 persons, such as GOO, 00, 00, 00, 00, 00, 000, 00, 00, 00, 00, 1,000, 1,000, 2, 1,000, 2, 1,00, 1,00, 2, or 1,00, 2, or 1,00, won.

Accordingly, the above defendant made a contribution, and carried out an election campaign before the election campaign period.

Summary of Evidence

[Judgment No. 1]

1. Each part of the statements made by Defendant Kim *, Song 00, and Park O in the first trial records

1. In the third trial records, some of the witness Kim Kim Ma-tae's statement

1. Entry of a verification protocol concerning each video file in each protocol of the second and third trial;

1. Defendant Kim*, each protocol of examination of suspect suspect against Song 00, written in part of each prosecutor's protocol of examination on the defendant Kim * and Song 00

1. Statement by the prosecution concerning union00;

1. Each letter of questions about Kim MaMaMaMa MaMaMa, Choi 00, Kim & Kim, and Lee 00

1. A certified public accountant, etc. (a certificate No. 13, No. 14 (a certificate No. 14, Dec. 2, 2011);

(E) No. 15, No. 15 (the currency of those present on December 2, 201), and the evidence of the case No. 2012, No. 32

212 to 217 pages), investigation reports (in addition to a copy of the 00 pocket book), inquiry into details of financial transactions, financial ruling

(b) Personal information provided, application for deposit

[Judgment No. 2]

1. Each part of the statements in the first trial record* Defendant Kim *, and Song 00

1. The witness’s each legal statement 00, the preceding 00

1. Statements of 00 witnesses in the third protocol of the trial;

1. Written answers to 00, 000

1. Reference materials, etc. (311 pages of the evidence of the case No. 2012, 322);

[Judgment No. 3]

1. Entry of Defendant Kim 00 in the first trial record;

1. Entry of verification records concerning video files in the second protocol of the trial;

1. Entry of each part of the prosecutor's office and police statement concerning 00;

1. Each reply to 00, Kim 00, Kim 00, Park 00, Park 00, Park 00

[Judgment No. 4]

1. Each part of the statements made by the defendant Kim 00 and Cho 00 in the first trial record;

1. Partial statement of the witness at least 00;

1. The entry of some of the witnesses in the third protocol of trial;

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of interrogation of defendants Kim 00 and Cho 00 containing some statements

1. Each reply to 00, 00, No.00, No.00, b00, electricO, b00, b.00, b.00

1. A self-written statement of 00 preparation;

1. References, etc. (the photographs changed in the reservation status on February 2, 2012, and the evidence records of the case No. 2012, 32, 675

to 677 pages

[Judgment No. 5]

1. A witness's legal statement;

1. In the third protocol of trial, each part of the defendant Kim 00 and Song 00

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of examination of the suspect against Defendant Kim 00 and Song 00

1. Each letter of answer to AnchorO;

1. An investigation report (report on confirmation of the place of installation of a telephone machine recorded in the mermosite from among the data on search and seizure, and guidance and blank;

On August 25, 2011, the National Mental Campaign Headquarters website output), 11 copies of relevant photographic data, and the newspaper conferredd on August 21, 201

A copy of examination of interview articles and warning documents of Kim 00

[Judgment No. 6]

1. Defendant Kim 00’s legal statement

1. The prosecutor's statement of his/her prosecutor with respect to Kim Jong-dae;

1. An investigation report (a report on the execution of a warrant of search and seizure);

[Judgment 7] Each Facts of Judgment 7

1. Defendant Kim 00’s partial statement

1. Each legal statement of a witness stuff, 00, oO, and new00;

1. A report on internal investigation (in general);

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles of criminal facts;

0. Defendant Kim 00: Articles 257(1)1, 113(1) (the act of making contributions as stated in the judgment) of the Public Official Election Act, Articles 257(1)1, 113(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act (the act of making contributions as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment), Article 254(2)(2) of the Public Official Election Act, Article 254(2) of the Public Official Election Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the act of making prior election as stated in the judgment), Article 255(2)5 of the Public Official Election Act, Article 255(1)(7) of the Public Official Election Act (the act of making contributions as stated in the judgment of the court below), Article 25(1)1 of the Public Official Election Act, Article 257(1)1 of the Public Official Election Act, Article 25(1)1 of the Act and Article 93(1)(3)1 of the Political Parties Act established.

0. Defendant Kim*: Articles 257(1)1 and 113(1) of the Public Official Election Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (as a whole, Article 30 of the Criminal Act), Article 254(2) of the Public Official Election Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (in a case of prior election), Articles 255(2)5 and 93(1) of the Public Official Election Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (in a case of distribution of name cards by illegal means)

Defendant Song 00: Articles 257(1)1 and 114(1) of the Public Official Election Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act ( comprehensively referred to as "contribution act"); Article 254(2) of the Public Official Election Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of prior election); Articles 255(2)5 and 93(1) of the Public Official Election Act; Articles 255(2)5 and 93(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of distribution of name cards by illegal means); Articles 255(1)13 and 89(1) of the Public Official Election Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of establishment of similar institutions)

0. Defendant Park 00: Articles 257(1)1 and 115 of the Public Official Election Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (as a whole, the point of contribution), Article 254(2) of the Public Official Election Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of prior election), Articles 255(2)5 and 93(1) of the Public Official Election Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of distribution of name cards by illegal means)

Defendant Cho 00: Articles 257(1)1 and 115 of the Public Official Election Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of contribution) , Article 254(2) of the Public Official Election Act, and Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of advance election campaign)

1. Competition;

0. Defendant Kim 00: Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (the crimes of each subparagraph of Article 3 of the Judgment and each subparagraph of Article 4 of the Judgment), among the crimes of violation of the Public Official Election Act due to each advance election campaign, and the crimes of violation of the Public Official Election Act due to the distribution of name cards by illegal means, and punishment imposed on the crimes of violation of the Public Official Election Act due to a prior election with heavier quality of each crime)

0. Defendant Kim*: Articles 40 and 50 (Mutual Crimes of No. 1 of the ruling, mutual crimes of No. 2 of the ruling, and punishments imposed on the violation of the Public Official Election Act due to the most severe contribution act) of the Criminal Act.

0. Defendant 00: Articles 40 and 50 (Mutual Crimes of No. 1 in the Judgment, Mutual Crimes of No. 2 in the Judgment, and Punishment of Punishment on the Violation of the Public Official Election Act due to the most severe contribution act) of the Criminal Act

Defendant Park 00: Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (Punishments imposed on the violation of the Public Official Election Act due to each crime of the judgment No. 1, and due to the most severe contribution act)

1. Selection of punishment (the Defendants)

Selection of each fine

1. Separate sentence for concurrent crimes;

10 Defendant Kim 00: Article 18(3) and 18(1)3 of the Public Official Election Act (each violation of the Public Official Election Act and each violation of the Political Parties Act shall be separately imposed)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

0. Defendant Kim 00: the former part of Article 37, Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (trades violating the Public Official Election Act, punishment and aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes against a crime of violating the Public Official Election Act due to a contribution act as provided in paragraph (4) of the same Article which is the most severe judgment)

0. Defendant Kim*: Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 (Aggravation of concurrent crimes with punishment prescribed in the Public Official Election Act due to a contribution act as stated in paragraph (1) of the same Article with heavy circumstances) of the Criminal Act

0. Defendant 00: the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (the punishment shall be aggravated for concurrent crimes with punishment prescribed in the Public Official Election Act due to a contribution act as stated in paragraph (1) of the same Article with the largest penalty)

o Defendant 100: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravation of concurrent crimes with punishment prescribed in a crime of violating the Public Official Election Act due to a heavier act)

1. Detention in a workhouse (the Defendants)

Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Code

1. The provisional payment order (the Defendants)

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Judgment on the defendants' and defense counsel's arguments

1. The assertion and judgment on the act of donation and distribution as stated in the facts constituting the crime No. 1 and No. 2 of the judgment

A. Defendant Kim *, Park O, and Song 00's arguments

(1) In the case of the act of contribution and the act of distributing name cards as stated in the criminal facts of the judgment, the defendant Park Sang-O voluntarily bears the meal cost, and the defendant Park Jong-O distributed two copies of his name cards on his own book at his own discretion, and the defendant Kim * did not know at all about the act of distributing each of the above acts of contribution and name cards, and on the acts of 00 and 00 degrees delivered by the defendant Park Jong-O.

there is no conspiracy.

(2) The act of contribution and the act of distributing the name and the name and the name and the name and the name and the name and the name and the name and the name and the name and the name and the name and the name of the defendant as stated in the crime No. 2 of the judgment of the court.

B. Determination

(1) In the case of accomplices who are jointly engaged in a crime by more than two persons, a public offering does not require any legal term, but is sufficient if there is an implied communication with each other on the joint performance of a crime directly or indirectly, and if there is no direct evidence, it may be recognized by the circumstantial facts and empirical rules (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Do868, Jun. 28, 2002, etc.). In addition, if the subject of a crime subject to the restriction on contributions is assessed as a contribution act by taking into account various circumstances, it is sufficient that the subject of the crime subject to the restriction on contributions is assessed as a person who has ownership or right to dispose of the goods provided, but it is not necessarily a person who has ownership or right to dispose of the goods provided, and if a person who is not recognized as a person subject to each contribution under Articles 113 through 115 of the Public Official Election Act makes a contribution in collusion with the person subject to the contribution act, it shall be punished under the relevant Act according to his status (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 907Do757, Mar. 13, 2008).

(2) In the case of the donation and distribution of name as stated in Paragraph (1) of the criminal facts stated in the judgment above, Defendant Park 00 and Song 00, taking into account the following circumstances recognized by each of the above evidence in the judgment, the public offering is made:

On the other hand, it is sufficiently recognized that each of the above donations and distribution activities was performed, and it is reasonable to view that there was a crime of donation and distribution in collusion with Defendant Park 00 and Song 00, by attending the above gathering and raising an appeal for support for Defendant Kim 00, even though he was aware that Defendant Kim * also contributed and distributed a name.

1. Defendant Park 00, at the early investigation agency of the Republic of Korea, hold a meeting at a restaurant of the said yellow charcoal shots;

Although it was stated to the effect that the above gathering was the annual end of the year, it is reasonable to see that the above gathering was not an annual end of the year for the people, but an advance election campaign of Defendant Kim * The above gathering was formed by Defendant Park 00 for the purpose of making contributions for Defendant Kim 00, in view of the fact that Defendant Park 00 was present at the above gathering, that Defendant Park Jong-mmm (Straw Mammmmmo Sksan Sksan Sksan) stated that Defendant Park Jong-m (hereinafter referred to as “Evidence of 2012 Go-m32 case evidence records”) was that Defendant Park Jong-mick was present at the meeting, but Defendant Park Jong-m, who was present at the meeting, but Defendant Park mick-mick for the purpose of making contributions for Defendant Kim 100 (this court recognized his own contribution act in this court**, Defendant Kim, and Defendant Park Jong-mok did not agree with it).

② Defendant Park 00 and the day of the above gathering: (a) Defendant Park 00 calls three times only on the day of the above gathering (provings 216, 217 pages) and act as the organizer of a gathering, such as joining the restaurant; and (b) around 4:0 p.m., immediately before the meal day, Defendant Park 1 loaded a box containing Kim0’s self-defense at the Central Bag Movement Headquarters around 10 p.m. and distributed the boxes, etc. using the above meals, without compensation, and distributed name cards. In light of the above, it is reasonable to view that Defendant Park 00 conspired Defendant Park 1 to commit an act under mutual communication with the intent of forming the above gathering for the purpose of making an act of donation for Kim 00; and (c) it is difficult to view that Defendant Park 1 had been holding the right of donation at the time of the above gathering on Nov. 7, 201 and there is no degree of distribution of the right of donation at the time of the above gathering.

③ Defendant Kim** asserts that he did not know about the nature of the above gathering and its organizer, etc. on the day of the above gathering that he did not contact the above gathering. However, Defendant Kim ** stated that he was asked to attend the above gathering from 00, which was (Evidence No. 30 pages) and that he was committing an advance election campaign at the above gathering. In addition, Defendant Kim * 00 who was present at the above gathering was aware of the danger of the above gathering * 00, who was present at the above gathering’s punishment * 00, who was present at the above gathering, and who was present at the above gathering’s punishment * 00, who was present at the above gathering, and who was present at the above gathering * Kim 00, who was present at the above gathering, it is difficult to see that Defendant Lee Jong-chul was the intention of help Defendant Kim 16, who was present at the above gathering, as evidence and objective of the above crime * 109, who was present at the above gathering.

(3) The following circumstances acknowledged by each evidence of the judgment regarding the donation and distribution of statements stated in Paragraph (2) of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment, i.e., (i) Defendant Kim*** has an in-depth group with female members of the in-depth group consisting of up to 00 Defendant, and (ii) has been made to participate in the above Mediet. (Evidence No. 133, 1334 pages) at the time, there were no full-time members except for Defendant Song Jong-dong branch at the time, so Defendant Kim * appears to have been aware of the fact that the sponsor of the above group was 00, and (iii) Defendant Kim Jong-dong branch was aware of the fact that there were no in-depth members of the above 10th session in collusion with the above 0th session, and that most of its establishment and operation were assumed by Defendant Kim Jong-O as an organization established around July 20, 201, and that Defendant Lee Jong-dong was not allocated membership fees to the pertinent elector or the head of the election concerned.

(4) Accordingly, each of the above defendants' arguments is rejected.

2. The assertion and judgment as to each contribution act as stated in the facts constituting the crime No. 3, 4, and 7 of the judgment

A. Summary of the argument

(1) Defendant Kim 00: In the case of a contribution act as indicated in the crime No. 3 of the judgment, the above Defendant did not have any awareness thereof. In the case of a contribution act as indicated in the crime No. 4 of the judgment, Defendant Kim O only borne the meal cost at will by 00, and Defendant Kim O did not have conspired with Defendant No. 1 and did not know about Defendant Cho O’s contribution act. In the case of a contribution act as indicated in the crime No. 7 of the judgment, the liability per se was not given.

(2) Defendant 1: In the case of a contribution act as stated in the facts of the crime No. 4 of the judgment, the person himself voluntarily made it, and there is no conspiracy with Defendant Kim 00.

B. Determination

(1) According to the above facts of the crime of donation stated in the judgment, i.e., the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence of the judgment, i.e., ① the above 60th executive officer's photographed 1, i.e., the above 6th executive officer's interview opened an entrance and confirmed other circumstances, i.e., about 3, 4 minutes after the 6th executive officer's completion of the 6th executive officer's meeting, Defendant Kim 00 went out of the "spating" relief with the participants. The above Defendant was able to fully recognize the distribution of the 0th executive officer's 1st executive officer's 0th executive officer's 3th executive officer's 0th executive officer's 0th executive officer's 0th executive officer's 0th executive officer's 0th executive officer's 0th executive officer's 0th executive officer's 0th executive officer's 0th executive officer's 0th executive officer's 1st executive officer's 8th executive officer's c.

(2) In the case of the crimes described in Paragraph (4) of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment, comprehensively considering the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence in the judgment, Defendant Kim 00 can be found to have committed an act of making a contribution in collusion with Defendant 10 even though he well-known that the above group was for the purpose of making a contribution for himself.

① Defendant 00 has been promoted for meetings at the above Dom cafeteria, with the intention of the Federation to make it difficult for the Federation to become a member of the Nowon 00 Secretariat of the Federation of Assistant Agricultural Personnel (hereinafter referred to as the “Federation”) or to make a concurrent and private meal for her year, due to the problems such as the increase in the number of members, etc. However, Defendant 00 was not known of this fact at the time of the above meeting, and Defendant 1 was replaced with meals due to Defendant 1’s 00.

The above federation sent text messages to the effect that the officers of the Nana Council Kim 00 Chairman were asked to attend the above meetings (Evidence No. 578, 579) and the above federation sent text messages to the effect that the officers of the Nana Council Kim 00 Chairman was asked to attend the above meetings, and that there was no instruction to contact with the meals due to the issue of the chief secretary-general of the Mana Council No. 000, he did not inform the participants that he would not want to attend the meeting (Evidence No. 605, 623 of the evidence record), and that the participants stated that he was unable to hear the speech that he would go through a boom at a restaurant (Evidence No. 6005, 623 of the evidence record), and that the prosecutor did not want to do so at least 00 for the purpose of Defendant 189, and that Defendant 1 did not present the above purpose of his election campaign (Evidence No. 189).

② In addition, it seems that the above conference was held in the name of "Yanyang-Yandong Council Kim Jong-soo, the secretary-general of the party members council Kim Jong-soo, at the request of Defendant Cho Jong-soo, the above conference, and the above conference was held in favor of the above conference (Evidence No. 1199). In light of the above relationship and the details of the reservation, it seems that the above conference was known that the members of the above federation did not bear their own expenses, but rather, that at least 00 Defendant Cho Jong-ok did not want to participate in the above conference with their own expenses. Nevertheless, it is difficult to view that the above conference was held in the presence of the above conference without examining the above conference's purpose, organizer, etc., at least 0 members did not know that the above conference was held in favor of the above defendant Kim Jong-ok, and that the above conference was held in favor of the defendant Kim 00's prosecutor's own opinion or with the opinion of 00 members of the above conference. Rather, it was reasonable to introduce the above evidence to the defendant Kim 100.

(3) According to the statements of the participants at the time, in the case of the crime described in Paragraph (7) of the crime in the holding, the fact that Defendant Kim 00 made an act of donation to distribute his own books free of charge through GaO is sufficiently recognized.

(4) Accordingly, each of the above defendants' arguments is rejected.

3. The assertion and determination as to the establishment of a similar institution as stated in the crime No. 5 of the judgment

A. Summary of Defendant Kim 00 and Song 00's argument

The Central White Movement Headquarters is not a similar organization established for the purpose of affecting the election, but a safe protection organization established for pure volunteer service or security education.

B. Determination

(1) Article 89(1) of the Public Official Election Act prohibits an act of newly establishing, establishing, or using existing facilities, regardless of the name of a candidate (including a person wishing to become a candidate), in addition to an election campaign office or election campaign liaison office provided for in the same Act, for the sake of maintaining equity in election campaign organizations among candidates and preventing excessive competition and waste due to the establishment of various forms of election campaign organizations.

Inasmuch as whether a person is a similar institution is determined by the existence of the purpose of election campaign, if a person who intends to become a candidate establishes an organization, etc. for the purpose of affecting the electors beyond the dimension of internal election preparation, it constitutes a similar institution as provided in the above provision (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do303, Jun. 27, 2006, etc.).

(2) According to the evidence of the court below, the defendant 2 was established on July 12, 201, 200, the above 10-1 5-3-2-2-2-3-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-3-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-3-2-2-3-2-2-3-2-4-2-3-2-2-3-2-4-2-3-2-4-2-3-2-4-2-3-2-4-2-3-2-4-2-4-2-4-2-3-2-4-2-4-2-4-2-3-4-2-4-2-4-2-4-2-4-2-4-2-3-4-4-2-4-2-4-3-3-14-3-2-4-4-10-3-14-2-3-3-2-7-3-2-3-4-2-3-4-2-3-3-4-2-

Defendant 0 made it clear that the above facts were 00 days after establishment of the 0th election campaign headquarters, which was approved by the above facts. The above Defendant appears to have had an intention to participate in politics through newspapers. In light of this, since the establishment of the 0th election campaign headquarters, the above Defendant continued to engage in the election campaign under the name of "the 19th presidential election for the 19th National Assembly members" even after clearly expressing his intention to participate in the election of the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the 0th presidential election for the same reason.

(3) Accordingly, the above Defendants’ assertion is rejected.

Reasons for sentencing

1. Defendant Kim 00

The above Defendant, who participated in the 19th National Assembly election and participated in the election, was in a position to be dismissed for the violation of the law-abiding spirit and the Public Official Election Act. At the time of each of the crimes of this case, the Defendant, at the time of committing each of the crimes of this case, engaged in prior election campaigns, such as making a contribution prohibited under the Public Official Election Act, distributing or supporting name cards, and establishing an organization similar to the election campaign organization, and then committed an act that affects the election for the relevant electorates.

In particular, in relation to the fact of a contribution act, the act of contribution is likely to distort an individual’s free will due to unfair economic interests in an election to be made by free decision-making. Thus, Article 113(1) of the Public Official Election Act prohibits in principle the act of contribution regardless of the name, form, and time of the act of contribution to ensure the transparency and fairness of the election. Nevertheless, the above defendant provided or distributed a meal amounting to KRW 491,200 over three times in total, and the nature of the crime is excessive. Furthermore, each of the above defendants' violations of the Public Official Election Act cannot be deemed to have entirely affected the election, and the above defendants still have different errors, such as denying each of the above defendants' acts of contribution, and in order to meet the citizens’ demands for clean and clear election culture, it is inevitable to take into account the above defendant’s responsibility for unlawful or legal election campaign.

Taking into account all the above circumstances, even if the above defendant was a first offender and was serving for a long time as a soldier, and considering the above defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the crime, it is inevitable to sentence the above defendant to invalidate the election, and the punishment as ordered is determined by considering all the above circumstances.

2. Defendant Kim *

The above defendant committed a prior election campaign by denying the election of the 19th National Assembly member, such as making a donation prohibited under the Public Official Election Act, distributing the name cards, or evading support. The nature of the crime, such as the amount of the donation up to 827,560 won, is not less than that of the crime. Furthermore, the above defendant's above act does not have any influence on the election, and the above defendant still denies the above act, such as denying the above act of the 19th National Assembly member and denying the above act of the 19th National Assembly member, should be punished strictly.

However, the above defendant is the first offender, and it appears that he did not actively lead each of the above crimes of contribution, and the above defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the crime are considered, the punishment as ordered shall be determined in light of various circumstances.

3. Defendant 00

The above defendant, as an election campaign worker for the 19th National Assembly member, was engaged in a donation prohibited under the Public Official Election Act, and was engaged in a prior election campaign, such as distributing name cards or asking for support, and established an organization similar to an election campaign organization, and based on this, the effect of election on the relevant

In light of the following facts: (a) the Defendant did not have any effect on the election; (b) the Defendant’s above act is still not divided by denying the conspiracy with the Defendant Kim **; and (c) the Defendant appears to have practically led to the commission of each act of donation as stated in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the facts constituting the crime in its holding; and (d) the above Defendant should be punished strictly, taking into account the following: (a) the commission of each act of donation as stated in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the same Article is deemed to have been committed.

However, in consideration of the fact that the above defendant has no criminal history of the same kind, and other circumstances, such as the age, character and conduct, background of exchange, and circumstances after the crime, the punishment as the order shall be determined.

4. Defendant Park 00, Comparison00

In light of the fact that the above Defendants are in a planned election for the 19th National Assembly members and are engaged in the act of contribution for the defendant Kim 00, etc., it is necessary to punish the above Defendants strictly in light of the fact that the purpose of legislation of the Public Official Election Act to ensure the fairness of the election is harmed, and the nature of the crime is not weak, and that the above Defendants still do not repent, such as denying the conspiracy with the defendant Kim 00 or defendant Kim ***.

However, Defendant Park 00 and Cho 00, on the ground that Defendant Kim 00’s support person was for Defendant Kim Kim 00, led to each of the instant crimes, and appears not to have accrued any benefit therefrom. The said Defendants did not have the same criminal records, and other circumstances, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc. of the said Defendants, shall be determined as per Disposition in consideration of the aforementioned Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, and the part of innocence.

1. Summary of the facts charged

The summary of this part of the facts charged is that Defendant Kim 00 and Cho 00 conspired to make a contribution by providing the 340,000 won meals to the 20 members of the federation, the executive officers of the Eup/Myeon branch, and the 20 members of the Eup/Myeon branch on December 7, 2011, as stated in paragraph (4) of the above facts charged.

2. Determination:

The evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is sufficient to recognize that the attending person provided meals of an amount equivalent to 299,200 won (the total meal expenses of 408,000 won x 11: 15 members (the total number of participating persons: 408,00 won: 15 members)) as stated in paragraph (4) of the facts constituting a crime as indicated in the judgment by the prosecutor, and that the participating person provided meals of an amount of 340,000 won (the total meal expenses of 408,000 won x20 members (the total number of participating persons of the federation): 24 members (the total number of participating members of the federation): there is no evidence to determine otherwise.

Therefore, since this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of a crime, it should be pronounced not guilty under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, but the judgment in a single crime

As long as it is found guilty of the violation of the Public Official Election Act due to the act of contribution under paragraph (4) of the facts constituting the crime, the decision of innocence shall not be rendered separately.

Judge Kang Jong-soo

Judges Park Jong-hee