All appeals filed by A and the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

A. Defendant A 1) In the instant contribution act by mistake or misunderstanding the legal principles, Defendant A did not request the members of the G Livestock Industry Cooperatives (hereinafter “G Livestock Industry Cooperatives”) to travel abroad, but maintained the F Livestock Industry Cooperatives (hereinafter “F Livestock Cooperatives”) and supplied feed.

G Livestock Cooperative Livestock Industry Headquarters was conducted at the level of special promotional events and sisterhood alliance. Thus, Defendant A cannot be deemed to have made a contribution, and Defendant A had no intent to see the effect of the contribution in this case unless there was any reference in the election in the process of the contribution in this case.

It is also difficult to see it.

2) The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) In light of the fact-misunderstanding or misunderstanding of the legal principles (as to Defendant B), the Act on the Election of Public Officials and the Act on the Election of Agricultural Cooperative cannot be applied to this case because of a change in the regulatory system. Article 50-2(5) of the Act on the Election of Public Officials is merely a provision on the contribution act during the contribution-restricted period, and thus cannot be extended and applied to the contribution act before that period. In a case where a third party participated in the contribution act during the term of office of the head of the association, it shall be deemed that the main sentence of Article 3 and Article 30 of the Criminal Act shall apply in accordance with the general legal principles concerning the case where a non-party took part in an act of contribution during his status.

Therefore, if a contribution act during the term of office of the president of a cooperative violates Article 50-2 (6) of the Agricultural Cooperative Act, a third party who participated in the act should be punished as an accomplice.

B) Even if the judgment of the court below, if a third party participated in a contribution act while in office as the head of an association, a third party may be punished only when he/she contributed an election.

Even if considered, the circumstances leading up to the contribution act in this case.