If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

The defendant is a local public official of Grade VI local administration in charge of the viewing C and D.

Local public officials provided for in Article 2 of the Local Public Officials Act may not conduct an intra-party competition campaign.

Nevertheless, on May 5, 2014, the Defendant: (a) 11:14, at the Defendant’s house, on May 5, 2014, G, a preliminary candidate for nationwide and provincial election 503, at the 6th time, to 115 persons, such as I, B, and B, using mobile phones, for the purpose of having him/her serve in the H party competition line by using a mobile phone for the purpose of having him/her serve in the H party competition.

. Gly friendly high-friendly districts among neighboring neighbors shall be publicly announced.

A. by sending text messages with the content of “A”, the competition campaign was conducted.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Details of currency;

1. The addressee of text messages;

1. Public official identification card;

1. Application of each text message to the Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 255 (1) 1, 57-6 (1), and 60 (1) 4 of the Public Official Election Act concerning criminal facts and the selection of punishment;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act with respect to detention in a workhouse;

1. The scope of punishment: Fines of 50,000 to 6 million won; and

2. Application of the sentencing criteria [Determination of type] Violation of the method of election campaign (type 2) in violation of the election campaign period, which violates the election campaign period (type 2). (Scope of the sentence of recommendation] fine of KRW 700,000 to KRW 2 million.

3. Determination of sentence: The Public Official Election Act, which is the basis of democratic politics, aims to ensure the legitimacy of state power and to contribute to the maintenance and development of democratic politics by ensuring the legitimacy of state power and by preventing any malpractice related to the election in a fair manner in accordance with the free will of the people and democratic procedures. Therefore, it is necessary to strictly punish violations.

In addition, the crime of this case is a public official who is responsible for the social responsibility to make efforts for fair elections in a neutral position.