The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 7,00,00, and by a fine of KRW 800,000.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant A made a statement to the effect that the Defendants’ misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles [2012 Gohap583] part (Defendant A) (“Defendant A”) only made a statement to the effect that the Defendants “at present is a candidate for the other party”, and did not mention the results of the public

The contents of the results of the instant public opinion poll do not fall under the publication of the results of public opinion poll prohibited under the Public Official Election Act, since they did not include survey institutions, research methods, and details of inquiries.

Defendant

B The court below selected a more severe punishment as a crime of commercial concurrent crimes, when it rateed the violation of the Public Official Election Act due to the violation of prohibition of publication results of public opinion poll and the violation of the Public Official Election Act due to the violation of methods of publication.

Defendant

B is only distributed as news report materials by arranging the detailed contents of Defendant A, and it is not the subject of publication of the results of public opinion poll.

Defendant

B There was no criminal intent to publish the results of public opinion poll in violation of the Public Official Election Act.

Defendant

The contents of the results of the public opinion poll published by B are abstract and political relief, so it is difficult to view it as a publication of the results of public opinion poll subject to regulation under the Public Official Election Act.

Since the violation of the Public Official Election Act due to the violation of the public opinion poll method is established on the premise that the public opinion poll result is allowed to be published, the violation of the Public Official Election Act due to the violation of the prohibition of publication of the public opinion poll result and the violation of the Public Official Election Act due to the violation of the methods of publication of the results of public opinion poll are in the relation

[2012 Gohap602] (Defendant A) Defendant A did not engage in an election-related request or contribution, and did not make a golf by gathering a person to assist in an election, and there was no fact that Defendant A gave 20,000 won in cash to P.

In addition, the defendant A had no intention to participate in the election at the time, and therefore, Article 113, Paragraph 1 of the Public Official Election Act.