2. The judgment of the court below is that the defendant contributed 3 million won to an organization to which many electors belong during the contribution-restricted period. It is not good that the crime of this case is not committed.

Since the election of the president of a certain E-association is highly closed due to a small number of electors, it is necessary to cope with crimes related to the above election in order to ensure the fairness of the election.

On the other hand, the defendant shows the attitude to recognize and reflect his own crime late, and there is no record of punishment exceeding the same kind of crime or fine.

The defendant is merely a passive payment of special membership fees at the request of an elector's member, and in light of the size, activities, and details of donation, etc. of the contribution organization, it seems that the defendant's contribution directly influenced the formation of the elector's will, and in fact, the contribution act is not likely to have a significant impact 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 prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.