A. The sentence of the lower court (one year of suspended execution for six months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case in which the defendant provided money to voters or expressed his/her intent to provide money for election campaign in front of the election of the president of the association, is very bad.

B The election of the president of the cooperative is highly closed due to a small number of electors, so it is necessary to cope with crimes related to the election in order to ensure the fairness of the election.

The amount of money provided by the defendant is not at least one million won, and the elector who has expressed his/her intent to provide money also reaches five persons.

On the other hand, the defendant shows his attitude to recognize and reflect all of his crimes, and there is no criminal record.

The crime of this case by the defendant resigned after the registration of the candidate and before the election does not have any influence on the result of the election.

Comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means, consequence, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing of the lower court does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's argument of unreasonable sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.