logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 (춘천) 2021.02.03 2020노199
공직선거법위반
Text

All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The prosecutor (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s sentence (an amount of KRW 900,00) is too unhued and unfair.

B. Defendant (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) (1) and the Defendant committed a violation of the Public Official Election Act due to the former contribution act from D, which was ordered by D to “B to send the order to a disabled organization as requested by D,” and did not make a contribution act in collusion with D.

Nevertheless, the defendant made a contribution in collusion with D.

Recognizing this part of the facts charged, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) In order to be found guilty of violation of the Act on Election of Public Offices due to the distribution of documents, etc. by unlawful means, the Defendant’s purpose of “to exercise an influence on the election” is recognized. The Defendant sent the instant letter to the instant person according to D’s order without an intention to affect the election.

was only the case.

Nevertheless, with a view to having an effect on the election, the defendant distributed the slips of this case.

Recognizing this part of the facts charged, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

3) In a case where the important part of the violation of the Public Official Election Act due to the publication of false facts is consistent with objective facts, it does not constitute a false fact subject to punishment even if it differs from the truth in detail or somewhat exaggerated expressions are made.

This part of the facts charged is written in the Defendant’s order that the Defendant did not go to the 20th proportional National Assembly members of the political party to which he belongs, “20th proportional representative members of the National Assembly.” The Defendant attempted to recommend the 20th proportional representative members of the political party to which he belongs, but failed to be recommended. As such, the part of “20th proportional representative members” is consistent with objective facts.

arrow