2. The judgment below held that the defendant's act of disclosing the result of the public opinion poll on election in a disadvantage to the defendant (1) is a crime that interferes with the formation of free public opinion and undermines the fairness of election, and (2) under favorable circumstances, the defendant's act is considerably likely to cause a problem on his act on the day of committing the crime and deleted comments on his opinion within a short time after the defendant became aware of his act on the day

In full view of the fact that it is difficult to see, and that the defendant has no record of being punished for the same crime, the defendant was sentenced to a fine of 1.5 million won.

The sentencing of the court below seems to have been conducted within the reasonable scope by taking into account all the circumstances related to the sentencing, which are shown in the proceedings of this case, and the circumstances alleged by the prosecutor in the trial at the trial at the trial at the court below are considered sufficiently in determining the punishment. In addition, considering the following factors: the defendant's age, sexual conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, motive and circumstance of the crime, the means and consequence of the crime, and the jury's opinion on the sentencing of the court below (1.5 million won: 5% of the jury: 2 of the jury: 3 million won of the fine: 2 of the jury) and the jury's opinion on the sentencing of the defendant at the trial at the court below, which is proceeding with the citizen's participation, such as the circumstance after the crime, etc., in light of the fact that there is no change in special circumstances to assess the sentencing conditions of the court below until the trial at the court at the trial at the trial at the trial

The prosecutor's improper argument in sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit.

However, among the descriptions in the column of “application of statutes” of the lower judgment, “1. Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act mitigated for small amount” is “1.