Among them, the part concerning Defendant A, Defendant B, and Defendant C shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment;

A. Defendant A (unfair sentencing)’s punishment (the imprisonment of eight months and the suspension of execution of two years) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (unfair sentencing)’s punishment (a year and six months of imprisonment, a suspended sentence of three years, and a fine of three million won) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

(c)

Defendant

D1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles [the part concerning the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint conflict)] Defendant D urged A to repay money actually lent to A, and only exercised legitimate rights as an obligee.

Defendant

D A received KRW 50 million from A on March 31, 2015, but Defendant D received payment of one’s own property leased from A, which is the object of the crime of public conflict, and is not a delivery of “other’s property”, which is the object of the crime of public conflict.

No crime of conflict is established.

2) The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 3 million) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

(d)

(1) Unlike the Act on Election of Public Officials, the Act on Election of Public Organizations, Etc. (hereinafter “Entrusted Election Act”) prohibits all election campaigns through the establishment of an election campaign office or election campaign team, contrary to the Act on Election of Public Officials, unlike the Act on Election of Public Officials.

Therefore, since the offering of money to the elector for election campaign itself is the price for illegal election campaign, Defendant A's offering money to Defendant B and Defendant C for the purpose of election campaign constitutes a purchase act under Article 58 of the Entrustment Election Act.

According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, Defendant A provided Defendant B and Defendant C with a total of KRW 113 million for the purpose of election campaign, and Defendant B and Defendant C conspired to provide money for the purpose of election campaign and received the money.

Nevertheless, this part of the facts charged is acquitted.