Therefore, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the charged facts of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination:

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that Defendant B is the director general of the Compilation Bureau of the “E” newspaper for the region at D, and Defendant A is the seat of Defendant B.

Defendant

B published 12 on April 8, 2016, “E” newspaper No. 12, and around April 6, 2016, around April 6, 2016, the Chairperson of the 20th National Assembly candidate I candidate for the election of National Assembly member G political party H in the election of the National Assembly member of the 20th National Assembly was present at the mountain conference festivals located in D, and donated money and valuables. On April 11, 2016, the said article was written by the election news deliberation committee as if the candidate was accused at the prosecutor’s office, and thus, it is likely that the right holder might have an impact on the publication of a corrective report.

Except as provided for in the Election of Public Officials Act, no one shall distribute, spread, post, or affix a newspaper, communication, magazine, or the organ of an institution, organization, or facility, or any other publication, which carries an article about an election, in a way other than normal.

Nevertheless, on April 13, 2016, at around 00:25, the Defendants conspired to sell 307 J apartment units on the first floor, and Defendant B asked Defendant A to distribute 12 'E' newspapers published in J apartment units where articles subject to an order to publish a corrective report are posted, and Defendant A distributed 13 copies of the above newspaper at the entrance and stairs of the first floor of the apartment unit.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to publish an article about the election.