The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles ① The defendant received 9 million won from C as compensation for failure to operate the old wharf, which is the defendant's occupation, due to other election crimes, or as a substitute payment for fines for negligence in violation of the Election Act.

In other words, the defendant did not receive the above money from C in relation to the election campaign, but did not have awareness that he received the money in relation to the election campaign.

② Even if it is not even if the Defendant demanded C to pay the money, since it was after August 27, 2014 when the 64 nationwide local election was completed, it cannot be punished for constituting an intentional act ex post facto.

③ Nevertheless, the court below found Defendant guilty of this part of the charges. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles

A. Based on the circumstances stated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that: (a) the Defendant was actually engaged in the A’s election campaign after receiving a request from C to cooperate in the A’s election campaign, and was detained in other cases; and (b) upon release, C actively demanded C to pay the money as compensation for the election campaign; and (c) accordingly, received KRW 9 million from C.

In addition to the circumstances properly stated by the court below, considering the following circumstances, the defendant was provided KRW 9 million with respect to A's election campaign by taking advantage of the fact that the defendant was involved in A's election campaign, and was provided with the above money in relation to A's election campaign at the time.