2019Do18764 A. Fraud

(b)Fraud attempted

C. Violation of the Public Official Election Act

(d)Interference with operations;

1.(a)(c) A;

2.(c) B

Defendants

Attorney Shin Jin-han (Korean National Assembly for Defendant A)

Attorney Kim Jae-sik, Go-ju (for defendant B), Go-ju, Go-ju (for defendant B)

Gwangju High Court Decision 2019221, 2019Do222 (Consolidated) Decided December 2, 2019

February 27, 2020

All appeals shall be dismissed.

The grounds for appeal are determined.

1. Determination on Defendant A’s grounds of appeal

The argument that there is an abuse of the exercise of discretionary power in the judgment of the court below constitutes an unfair sentencing argument.However, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, imprisonment with or without labor for more than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the ground of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where Defendant A was sentenced to a more minor punishment, the determination of punishment is unfair. The argument that the purport of the purport is that the determination of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground of appeal.

2. Judgment on the grounds of appeal by Defendant B

For the reasons stated in the judgment below, the court below upheld the judgment of the court of first instance that convicted Defendant B of violating the Public Official Election Act due to the provision of money and valuables related to the recommendation of candidates. Examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the court below did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on “the act of offering money and valuables” and intention in relation to the act of recommending a specific person as a candidate as a candidate.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Ki-taik

Justices Park Jung-hwa

Justices Kim Jong-soo