2. The instant crime committed by Defendant A, in collusion with Defendant D, I, and C to show the promotional motion picture of Defendant D, and at the same time, Defendant A’s election campaigned prior to the election campaign period for a person expected to be a preliminary candidate in the 19th election of National Assembly members, for a person who is expected to be a preliminary candidate in the 19th election of National Assembly members. As such, Defendant A committed a crime by Defendant A for a considerable period of time through H public relations group activities, and the method of committing such crime was also organized and planned, which is disadvantageous to Defendant A.

On the other hand, Defendant A reflects the above Defendant A’s mistake in depth from the investigative agency to this court; Defendant A did not have the same criminal record, and did not exceed the fine; Defendant A appears to have committed such act in order to raise the recognition map of Defendant D, which may still be a political belief; Defendant A appears to have received money and valuables or received benefits in return; Defendant A did not have any voluntary elements; and Defendant A’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc. are considered as a whole. In light of the following circumstances, the sentence imposed by the above Defendant cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Of the application of statutes of the judgment of the court below, the provisions of the Public Official Election Act concerning "crimes" due to heavy advance election campaigns shall be imposed.