2. The judgment is an unfavorable circumstance to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant was aware of the status of village head and carried out an election campaign prior to the election campaign period, and that the degree of violation is not significant in that the subject of the above election campaign is 26 persons if the defendant lives.

On the other hand, the following facts are the circumstances favorable to the defendant: (a) the defendant led to the confession and reflect of the crime in this case; (b) the fact that the defendant committed the above crime in a somewhat contingent state with an appraisal occurring in the tourist bus; and (c) the first offender

The grounds for sentencing as above and other circumstances revealed in the arguments in this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, family relation, environment, background and degree of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc. / [decision of type] election, violation of the election campaign period and illegal election campaigns, and Type 2 (Violation of Election Campaign Method) [Special / Where the degree of violation of the election campaign method is minor - where the degree of violation of the election campaign method is minor - where the case is intended for an unspecified or large number of others [the scope of recommending area and recommendation] basic area, fine of KRW 700,000 or KRW 2 million [general person] mitigated element: serious reflectness, and no criminal punishment history, etc., the sentence of the court below is deemed unfair.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

3. The prosecutor's appeal of conclusion is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.