beta
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2016.07.01 2016고합275

공직선거법위반

Text

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a candidate E for a political party candidate for the 20th National Assembly member.

An election secretary may broadcast contents concerning music or election campaign for election campaign by using tape recorders or video camera at an open place, but in such cases, he/she shall not use tape recorder or video camera from 9 p.m. to 7 a.m. on the following day.

Nevertheless, around 06:10 on April 4, 2016, the Defendant used approximately 50 minutes of sound recording and video recording devices, which are installed in the H-type cargo vehicle, which is the air carrier for the E candidate election, around 7:00, in a way that repeatedly broadcasts theme of candidate and political party publicity and election campaign, using a broadcasting device installed in the H-type cargo vehicle, which is the vehicle for election campaign, located in Seoul F, around 07:0 on the same day.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A statement of the I;

1. 112 Entry of the details of report processing (the comprehensive situation room in Seoul Office 112); and

1. Statement of investigation report (verification as to whether a suspect is registered as a suspect election clerical staff);

1. Application of the visual Acts and subordinate statutes to one CDs on the screen by capturing a CCTV image data;

1. Article 256 (5) 10, Article 102 (2), and Article 79 (10) of the Act on the Election of Public Officials in Charge of Criminal Facts and Article 256 (10) of the Election of Public Officials in Charge of the Selection of Punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Provisional Payment Order is that the Defendant committed the instant crime at the time before the election was opened, even though he was responsible for complying with the Public Official Election Act as a campaign leader for the election of National Assembly members, and the Defendant continued to use a tape recorder and video camera even after he was urged by the police officer.

However, the circumstances favorable to the defendant include the fact that the defendant recognized all of the crimes in this case and reflected, that the defendant did not seem to have an active intent to impair the fairness of the election, and that the defendant has no criminal history.