All of the appeals by the prosecutor against the defendant B and the appeal by the defendant A are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the court below to Defendant B (one million won in penalty) is too unhued and unfair.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below to Defendant A (two years of suspended sentence in six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Defendant B received money and valuables from Defendant A even with the knowledge that it is expected that Defendant A will take place in the election of the president of the association. This is an act detrimental to the fairness of the election as well as the act of offering money, which is highly likely to be subject to criticism, and the amount of money received is not significant. However, in light of the circumstances of giving and receiving money, it does not seem that the Defendant was the criminal intent of the Defendant in light of the fact that the Defendant led to the confession of the crime in this case, and the circumstances of giving and receiving money, and it does not appear that the Defendant was the criminal intent of the Defendant in light of the circumstances of giving and receiving money, and other favorable circumstances such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime in this case, circumstances after the crime, etc., and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and theories of this case, and thus, the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

B. According to the favorable circumstances such as the fact that the defendant made a confession of the crime of this case while making a judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant A, the waiver of the election campaign by the head of the association who revealed the crime such as the provision of money and valuables by the defendant, etc. does not directly affect the election, and the defendant did not have the record of criminal punishment. However, the crime of this case also provides money and valuables from the prior election campaign, door-to-door visit, etc. in violation of the Acts and subordinate statutes, which is the act that is not the highest quality among the election crimes, and which seriously undermines the fairness of the election.