However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The defendant was a person who was the chairman of the election management committee of the redevelopment association B at his own city.

No person shall provide, or indicate an intention or promise to provide, money, valuables, entertainment or other property benefits in connection with the selection of promoters or executives of an association.

Nevertheless, around June 26, 2018, the Defendant stated that, with respect to the above redevelopment partnership’s election that was enforced on July 14, 2018, the Defendant would accept KRW 60 million from the members of the partnership, by means of giving F and E, a report on agreement with F and E to the members of the partnership, in order to allow F to withdraw from the above partnership’s office at the D coffee shop located in Guang-si, Do-si to withdraw from E and appoint E as the head of the partnership.

As a result, the defendant expressed his intention to provide money and valuables in relation to the selection of the president of the partnership.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Protocol of the police statement concerning G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to file reports on internal investigation;

1. Article 135 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, the selection of punishment and Article 132 subparagraph 2 of the same Act concerning criminal facts, and the selection of imprisonment;

1. Circumstances unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act: The Defendant expressed his/her intent to provide pecuniary benefits to a person who wishes to become the president of an association in the position of the president of an election management.

This is a crime that infringes on the procedural fairness and transparency of the urban rearrangement project that is linked with many interests, and the criminal liability of the accused is not less severe.

A favorable circumstances: The defendant is recognized as committing a crime and is against the defendant.

In this case, the defendant was not entitled to gain any profit, and the money was actually wrong or the defendant's act did not affect the election.

The defendant shall be punished by a fine.