횡령등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The following circumstances: (a) the resolution of the chairperson of the Election Management Committee (hereinafter “chairperson”) on the defendant’s summary of the grounds for appeal by the committee for the election management (hereinafter “the committee chairperson”) may be conducted by the resolution of the committee for the election management; (b) the promotion of the chairperson may be conducted by the resolution of the committee for the election management in relation to the procedures for convening the committee for the election management; (c) there is no specific provision in the management regulations and the election management regulations; (d) when the chairperson refuses to convene a meeting, at least 1/2 of the members requesting the meeting may directly convene a meeting in accordance with lawful procedures; (e) there is no provision on the procedures for convening the committee for the election management committee; and (e) there is a significant defect in the procedure even if all members did not undergo individual notification procedures.
In light of the above, although it is difficult to see that the decision was invalid, the court below judged that the above decision was invalid due to mistake of facts, and thereby acquitted each of the facts charged in this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Each of the facts charged in the instant case regarding the grounds for appeal is that, although the Defendant was urged to serve as the chairperson on June 28, 2014, he/she prepared a copy of a public announcement with qualification of the chairperson, and exercised it, by posting a notice of public announcement in the name of the chairperson, thereby hindering the election management business, and embezzled by refusing to return the operating expenses of the election management committee.
For the reasons indicated in its reasoning, the lower court, on June 28, 2014, found that the resolution of the Voluntary Election Management Committee on the relevant election management was seriously defective in the procedure.
Since the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize that the above resolution is valid, the defendant was acquitted.