The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for three years, for one year, for Defendant B, and for 10 months, for Defendant C.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

A misunderstanding of facts only stated that Defendant A made an investment in the election campaign that he would make full efforts to become a candidate for proportional representation to the maximum extent possible. Defendant D provided investment funds to obtain the membership of proportional representative candidates for the election campaign, and even if there was a deception on election campaign, Defendant D did not have a causal relationship with the dispositive act because it could not be said that there was an omission in mistake because it provided the investment funds to obtain membership, and the intent and ability to return the investment funds is sufficient, and therefore, it does not constitute a crime of fraud against D, separate from the civil default obligation.

The punishment sentenced by the court below to Defendant A (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

B misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, Defendant B invested in Defendant A’s election campaign with the purport that the principal of the investment is returned regardless of whether it was a public official or not, and that 100% of the profit was returned if it was known, and only recommended investment to Defendant C and D.

Even if the relationship between the above investment money and the recommendation of the candidate is recognized, the loan includes the amount of loan that recognized the candidate's recommendation relation at the original trial. Therefore, the part of the loan should be deducted because the candidate's recommendation relation is denied.

The sentence imposed by the court below on Defendant B (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

C misunderstanding of facts Defendant C provided Defendant A with a return of 20 billion won other than the investment principal of KRW 1.8 billion in relation to the election campaign regardless of the official election of proportional representative candidates, so the said investment amount is not related to the recommendation of the candidate.

① Defendant A is not in the position of objectively affecting the election of proportional representative candidates within AA Party.