In light of the gravity, etc. of the instant crime, the lower court’s punishment (fine of 6 million won) is too unfluent and unreasonable.

However, the purpose of the Public Official Election Act is to ensure the legitimacy of state power and to contribute to the maintenance and development of democratic politics by ensuring that the public election is held fairly in accordance with the free will of the people and democratic procedures, and by preventing any malpractice related to the election, and thus, it is necessary to strictly punish the act of violation. The crime of this case is that the defendant sent text messages of false contents to many other parties because it is imminent that the crime of this case is committed by the defendant on the election day.

However, not only does the Defendant have no history of criminal punishment for the same crime, but also recognized that all of the instant crimes were committed, and thus his mistake is divided in depth. In light of all of the various sentencing conditions specified in the arguments in the instant case, including the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, family relationship, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is sufficiently recognized within the scope of the appropriate punishment according to its responsibility. Therefore, it cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing cannot be accepted.

Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.