B. Violation of the Political Funds Act

(c) Concealment of evidence;

2. A. (c) B

3. (a) C.

The reasoning of the judgment of the original court is as follows: 11, 12 '31, 185, 385 'B' '31, 164, 385 'B'.

1. As to the defendant's appeal

Defendant did not submit a statement of reason for appeal within the period of submission of the statement of reason for appeal, and Defendant did not state the reason for appeal in the petition of appeal.

2. As to the grounds of appeal by a public prosecutor

For the same reasons as the decision of the court below, the decision of the court below is not guilty on the ground that the portion of the charge of this case's violation of the Public Official Election Act due to "the receipt of money or valuables related to the election campaign" and the portion of the promotional text message transmission expenses, the violation of the Public Official Election Act due to "the expenditure in excess of the election expenses" and the violation of the Political Act due to "the expenditure in excess of the reported deposit account," and the violation of the Political Act due to "the expenditure in excess of 31,164,385 won," constituted a case where the crime is not proven. Examining the reasoning of the judgment of the court below in light of the record, the above judgment of the court below is justifiable. The judgment of the court below is not erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the free evaluation of due to the violation of the logic and experience without failing to exhaust all necessary deliberation as to the grounds of appeal.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, but it is clear that there is any clerical error such as the judgment of the original court, and therefore, it is decided as per Disposition with the assent of all participating Justices on the bench, with the aim to correct it in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Rule.

Justices Park Sang-ok

Chief Justice Lee Ki-taik

Justices Park Jung-hwa