The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

A. Defendant and defense counsel (in fact-finding and misapprehension of legal principles) ① The judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the crime of aiding and abetting candidates is erroneous in disregarding the actual binding force of the jury's verdict of innocence in the participatory trial.

② The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the burden of proof and recognizing the falsity of the Defendant’s Twitness on the premise of determining the “influence” and “influence of illegality” in the crime of aiding and abetting a candidate’s corruption.

③ Although the contents of the Defendant’s Twit notices cannot be deemed as “defensive” against H candidates, the lower court determined that the Defendant’s misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of the legal doctrine regarding the defamation against the candidate in the crime of false accusation, thereby constituting a

④ Although the lower court determined that the Defendant’s public interest alleged on the grounds of the illegality dismissal is merely a nominal motive, it erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the grounds of the illegality dismissal under the proviso of Article 251 of the Public Official Election Act.

(5) The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the publication of false facts and the election of candidates.

B. With respect to the crime of publishing false facts, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the criteria for recognition of the crime and by denying the defendant's intention on the publication of false facts and not guilty, in violation of the rules of evidence.

(2) In relation to the crime of aiding and abetting a candidate, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the validity of the jury verdict and suspension of sentence, and by excessively minor punishment against the defendant.

2. The Defendant was a person who was the Chairman of the Joint Election Measures Committee for K-political L Candidates for the instant facts charged. As a result of the public opinion poll conducted on December 2, 2012 to the first patrol officer during the said election campaign period, the gap between the support rate between the Mparty H candidate and the above L candidate, which was going out of the above election, was revealed within the scope of error.

Accordingly, the defendant is "welves".