When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The defendant is a person who was working as a person in charge of accounting of a candidate E, who was going to the election district of Seodaemun-gu local council members of the 6th local election of Seodaemun-gu local council in 2014.

The defendant from April 1, 2014 to the same year.

6. By the end of 18.18, the Seoul Seodaemun-gu Seoul Western and the second floor E election office used the amount of the restriction exceeding KRW 48,00,00,00 for the election expenses of the c constituency for the National Assembly members of Seodaemun-gu Seoul Western local election, and the amount of the restriction exceeds KRW 49,793,090,00 for the election expenses, even though the amount of the restriction exceeds KRW 1,793,090 for the election expenses.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the record of handling affairs by judicial police officers;

1. Investigation reports on the preparation of handling affairs by judicial police officers;

1. A written accusation prepared by the Seodaemun-gu Election Commission;

1. A report on revenues and expenditures of political funds;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing revenues and expenditures of political funds other than election expenses;

1. Article 258 (1) 1 of the Public Official Election Act and Articles 122 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the selection of punishment;

2. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the confinement of a workhouse.

3. Reasons for sentencing under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order.

1. Scope of recommending sentencing criteria: No sentencing criteria shall be set;

2. Determination of sentence;

A. The Public Official Election Act limits the amount of election expenses to prevent unfair election of public officials, which is the basis of democratic politics, from being carried out in accordance with the difference in economic power between the candidates, and such regulations must be strictly and thoroughly observed.

B. The Defendant, as a person in charge of accounting in the election of the Gu Council member, has spent approximately seven times the amount of KRW 240,000 (1/200 of the amount limited to election expenses), which is the limit of excessive disbursement of the election expenses, exceeding seven times the amount of KRW 1,800,000, thereby impairing the fairness of election for public office. The Defendant’s responsibility is not weak.

(c) Provided, That (1) The accused shall have the same criminal records.