2012Gohap337(Separation) A. Violation of the Public Official Election Act

(b)False;

1.(a)OO and National Assembly members.

Residence, Suwon-gu, Busan 0 ○ Dong

【Gyeong-nam Gyeong-gun 00

2.(a)(b) Kim ○ and real estate brokerage business;

Sungwon-si, Sungwon-si, 00 Dong

Changwon-si ○○ Dong in the place of registration

3.(b) .00, food service

Residence, Suwon-gu, Busan 0 ○ Dong

Masan-si ○○ Dong in the place of registration

4.(a) 00 Doese, Non-Service

dwelling of Busan Suwon-gu 00 dong

Standard place of registration ○○ Dong-dong, Busan

5.A.O.O., O.O., Japan wholesale business

Residence, Suwon-gu, Busan 0 ○ Dong

Standard place of registration ○○ Dong-dong, Busan

6.(a)(○), public relations activities

Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government ○ Dong

Reference domicile Odong-gu Busan

7.A.00.Departments

Residential Dong-gu Busan Dong-dong 0 Dong

In the case of Jinju, ○ Dong in the original domicile

Yellowline (prosecution, public trial)

1. Law firm mediation rate (for the defendant 1);

Attorney Lee Ji-hoon

(For the defendant 1)

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1, Defendant 1, Defendant 1, Defendant 1

2. The background of the attorney-at-law (for the defendant 2 and 3):

3. The Korea Legal Aid Corporation's Busan Branch Office and its sub-branch (for the defendant 7);

Attorney Yang Sung-soo, Public-service Attorney Kim Hong-soo

November 23, 2012

1. The defendant ○○ is not guilty.

The summary of the judgment of innocence against the above defendant shall be published.

2. As to the crimes set forth in Section 1-A of the Judgment No. 1 in the judgment of the defendant Kim 00, a fine of two million won shall be imposed, and the crimes set forth in Section 1-B of the Judgment shall be punished by imprisonment for six months

If the above defendant fails to pay the above fine, he/she shall be confined in a workhouse for a period calculated by converting 50,000 won into one day.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

To order the above defendant to pay the amount equivalent to the above fine.

3. As to the crimes set forth in Section 1-A(A) of the holding of the defendant 00, a fine of 2.5 million won shall be imposed, and as to the crimes set forth in Section 1-b(b) of the holding of the judgment,

If the above defendant fails to pay the above fine, he/she shall be confined in a workhouse for a period calculated by converting 50,000 won into one day.

To order the above defendant to pay the amount equivalent to the above fine.

4. Defendant ○○ shall be punished by a fine not exceeding 2.5 million won.

If the above defendant fails to pay the above fine, he/she shall be confined in a workhouse for a period calculated by converting 50,000 won into one day.

To order the above defendant to pay the amount equivalent to the above fine.

5. Defendant ○○ shall be punished by a fine not exceeding one million won.

If the above defendant fails to pay the above fine, he/she shall be confined in a workhouse for a period calculated by converting 50,000 won into one day.

To order the above defendant to pay the amount equivalent to the above fine.

6. Defendant ○○ shall be punished by a fine not exceeding one million won.

If the above defendant fails to pay the above fine, he/she shall be confined in a workhouse for a period calculated by converting 50,000 won into one day.

To order the above defendant to pay the amount equivalent to the above fine.

7. Pronouncement of a sentence shall be suspended against Defendant 1, 1,00.

Criminal History Office

1. 피고인 김OO, 유00 【전제사실】 유○○과 박○○은 제19대 국회의원선거 (선거일 2012. 4. 11.)에서 부산 수영구 선거구에 출마하기 위해 2011. 12.경 ○○○당('○○○당'에서 2012. 2. 13. 현재의 당명으로 변경하였다. 이하 당명 변경 전후를 불문하고 '○○○당'이라고만 표시한다) 예비후보로 등록한 사람들이다. 2003년경 유○은 제4대 부산 수영구청장으로 재직하였고, 피고인 김○○는 부산 수영구 소재 ○○초등학교의 학부모회 회장이었으며, 피고인 유○○는 위 학부모회 총 무였다. 피고인 유○○는 2012.2.중순경「(이전생략)…..... 유○○ 의원으로 인한 가정파탄에 관한 이야기입니다. 저와 친한 동네 언니인 김○○가 ○○초등학교 어머니회장을 맡았고, 저는 총무를 맡아 활동을 하였습니다. 서로 비밀이 없는 사이였습니다. 유00 구청장이 언니에게 혼자만 오라고 하여 토요일 오후 1시쯤 언니가 구청장실을 찾아갔습니다. (중략) 그 후 유○○ 구청장은 언니에게 여러차례 연락을 해 와서 식사를 하고, 술도 같이 먹고 하면서 두 사람이 연인 사이가 되었습니다. 언니는 구청장이 자기에게 관심을 가져주는 것이 싫지가 않았다고 합니다. 그 뒤 모텔에서 관계를 가졌는데, (중략) 이런 모텔에서 관계를 가진 사례는 제가 언니로부터 직접 들은 것만 3회입니다. 결국 언니는 그 뒤 2개월 뒤쯤 임신을 하게 되었습니다. 이를 알게 된 형부(김○○의 남편)는 "왜 임신을 하였느냐"며 화를 내고 가정이 파탄에 빠지기 시작했습니다. 언니는 (중략) 낙태 수술을 하였습니다. (중략) 결국 가정파탄 끝에 이혼을 하고 혼자 외롭게 살아야 했습니다. 언니는 임신 후 유○○ 구청장이 연락두절이 되자 "배신감을 느낀다"며 …. (이하생략)」라는 내용의 "확인서"를 작성하여 김○○를 통하여 2012.2. 18.경 ○○○당 공직후보자추천심사위원회(이하 '공심위'라고 한다)에 제출하였다. 이후 피고인 유○○는 성추문의 당사자인 피고인 김00 가 직접 나타나 성추문이 단순히 떠도는 소문이 아닌 사실이라는 것을 밝혀야 유OO이 제19대 국회의원선거에서 부산 수영구 선거구의 000당 공천심사에서 탈락할 수 있다고 생각하고, 2012. 2. 20.경 피고인 김○○가 거주하고 있는 창원시로 찾아가 위 공천심사의 경쟁자인 박이 ○ 후보의 지지자인 김○○과 함께 피고인 김○○를 만났고, 그때부터 피고인 유○○와 김○○은 상호 연락하면서 피고인 김○○로 하여금 직접 ○○○당 공심위에 사실확인서를 제출하도록 하기 위해 "유○○이 2008년에 무혐의로 풀려났다고 주장한다."고 말하면서 피고인 김○○가 직접 나서도록 부추겼다. 이에 피고인 김○○는 2012. 3. 4.경 부산 수영구 00동에 있는 0000 호텔 중식당에서, 피고인 유○○ 및 김○○과 함께 「(이전생략)…... 유○○이 수영구청장 재직 시절 구청장실로 저를 부르시더니 (밀실 같은 곳에서) 뒤에서 저를 끌어안거나 스킨십을 하였습니다. 연인 같이 지냈습니다. 1~2회 부적절한 관계를 가졌습니다. 그렇게 만남을 가진지 1년 6개월쯤 지나자 그때부터 유○○ 구청장은 전화도 받지 않고 …... (이하 생략)」라는 내용의 확인서를 작성하여 이를 000당 공심위에 제출하였고, 위 확인서 기재와 같은 내용이 그 다음날인 2012. 3. 5.부터 ○○일보 등 언론에 보도되었으며, 같은 날 피고인 유○○와 김○○을 통해 박○○ 후보의 보좌관인 제○○와 비서인 박○○을 소개받아 이들과 긴밀히 연락하였다.

Accordingly, on March 13, 2012, ○○○○ has been engaged in 0:30 the Busan District Public Prosecutor’s Office (the defendant Kim○○○○ and ○○○) to the Busan District Public Prosecutor’s Office, which is located in Busan High-dong, Daegu District Public Prosecutor’s Office, for the purpose of preventing the election, slandering the complainant (○○○) by submitting a false statement stating the false facts on the public prosecutor’s office, and on March 14, 2012, the complaint(s) was presented to the effect that the prosecutor’s office was on the 0th 4th 4th o of Busan High-dong O-dong Ob-dong 00-000 building, and the prosecutor’s office did not have the same content as the witness’s first o’s name on the 0th o’s first o’s first o’s name on the 19th o’s first o’s name on the 19th o’t.

Criminal facts

A. Violation of the Public Official Election Act

No person shall slander a candidate (including a person who intends to become a candidate), his/her spouse, lineal ascendant or descendant, or sibling by openly pointing out facts through a speech, broadcast, newspaper, communication, magazine, poster, propaganda document, or any other means, with the intention of having him/her elected or having another person elected or not to be elected.

(1) A crime committed on March 14, 2012

Defendant 1, 200, 200, 200, 200, 200, 200, 200, 200, 200, 200, 200, 200, 200, 200, 200, 200, 200,000, 200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,000,00,000,00.

(2) On March 18, 2012, the crime of March 19, 2012, ○○○○ and ○○○○○ was committed with the reporters as mentioned in the above paragraph (1) but, on March 18, 2012, ○○ became final and conclusive as a candidate for 00 square meters in the Busan Young-gu election district, ○○ was willing to open to the National Assembly to publish the contents that ○○ had in a de facto marital relationship with Defendant Kim○, and on the same day, ○○○○○○ and ○○○○○○ in the Busan ○○-dong, Busan ○○○○○○○, along with the two copies of a de facto marital relationship with Defendant ○○○, which showed that ○○○○○ and ○○○○ had been ○○○○ ○○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ”).

As a result, Defendant Kim ○-○ and ○○ conspireds and slandered ○○ by publicly alleging facts for the purpose of preventing ○○, a candidate for the 19th National Assembly election, from being elected.

(b)False;

Defendant Kim ○-○ filed a complaint against him as above, and the facts are as follows: Defendant Kim O did not have any pregnancy or abortion due to the sex relationship with U.S. ○○, and there was no divorce with her husband due to that fact, Defendant Kim ○ did not have been divorced. On October 2004, Defendant Kim ○ used the fact that Defendant Kim ○ performed abortion and carried out her abortion due to the sex relationship with U.S. ○○○, and subsequently, Defendant Kim ○ stated in the accusation that the denial of all these facts was false and publicly announced.

Defendant ○○○○○ and ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, in the Busan ○○○○○○○○-1 OO building on March 2012, ○○○○○○○○○○○○○, ○○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○, ○○, ○, ○, ○, ○, ○, ○, ○, ○, ○, ○, ○, ○○, ○, ○○, ○, ○○, ○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, 200, ○○, and ○○, ○○, ever.).

As a result, Defendant KimO-O and UO did not report false facts to public offices for the purpose of having 00 criminal punishment.

2. Ma○○, Ma○, and Ma○○

No one shall install, display, post, or distribute any wreath, balloon, signboard, placard, advertising balloon, balloon, advertising tower, other advertising materials or facilities, or wear or distribute a tag, inspection, or other indicating objects, except for those prescribed by the Public Official Election Act, from 180 days before the election day to the election day. In such cases, the use of the name of a political party (including the preparatory committee for the formation of a new political party), the name or photograph of a candidate (including a person who intends to be a candidate), or any expression of the name or name of a candidate (including a person who intends to be a candidate) which may be inferred about the election, shall be deemed to have an influence on the election.

Defendant ○○ is an election campaigner of GaoO, Defendant 10, and Defendant 100 and 00. 01) respectively simple daily workers. Defendant 1 conspired in collusion to spread the sexual suspicion of OO in the constituency and form a negative image or public opinion on ○○○ by forming a negative image or public opinion against O○, thereby lowering the level of support for ○○○○’s residents and increasing the level of support for ○○○○○○○’s sexual suspicions. In order to make it possible to see ○○ and ○○○’s sexual suspicions, Defendant 1 tried to post daily workers inside the constituency by using them.

이에 피고인 조○○은 (you 하늘이 내려보고 있습니다! -최소한의 양심마저 버리지 않길 바랍니다」, 「그냥 한숨부터 나옵니다. 억장이 무너집니다. 자식보기가 부끄럽습니다. 동네 어른 보기가 민망할 따름입니다. 어느새 윗 동네 아낙들의 소담거리가 되어 버렸습니다. 아랫동네 포차에서는 안줏거리가 되어 버렸습니다. 옛말에 개도 닷새가 되면 주인을 안다고 했습니다. 수영은 You에게 수십년 정을 드렸건만 어떻게 그런 일을! 수영을 조금이라도 생각했다면 최소한의 양심마저 버리지 않았다면 먼저 수영에게 용서부터 구하는 게 도리가 아닐까요. 하늘이 내려보고 있습니다.」라는 내용이 기재되어 있는 피켓(가로 60㎝, 세로 90㎝) 10개, 앞면에는 「그게 you?」, 뒷면에는 「수영아? 우째 이런 일이!」 라는 문구가 각 기재되어 있는 조끼 5벌을 제작하여 2012. 3. 11.경 피고인 우○○에게 전달하였고, 피고인 우○○은 유○○에게 위 피켓을 들고 위 조끼를 착용할 일용직 근로자들을 모집하게 하였으며, 유○○은 이○○을 통해 모집한 피고인정○○과 이○○에게 위 피켓을 게시하고 위 조끼를 착용하고 있으면 일당을 주겠다고 제안하였고, 피고인 정○○과 이○○은 이를 수락하였다. 이후 피고인 우○○은 2012. 3. 12. 07:00경 부산 수영구 수영동에 있는 00주유소 앞 노상에서 유○○에게 위 피켓과 조끼를 건네주고, 유○○은 피고인 정○○과 이○○에게 이를 나누어주고 이를 각각 착용하게 한 후 부산 수영구 선거구 내에 위치한 망미우체국 앞, 대남로타리 부근 신호등 앞, 수영팔도 상가시장 입구, 수영병무청 부근 ○○아파트 입구 등 선거구민들이 자주 왕래하는 곳에 각각 서 있도록 지시하였다.

Accordingly, around 09:00 on the same day and around 16:10 on the same day, Defendant Jeongcheon-dong located in Suwon-gu, Busan, but around 08:30 on the same day and around 16:00 on the delivery in front of the post office located in the Dong-dong, Busan, and around 09:0 on the same day, ○○ was respectively in front of the luminous market located in Suwon-gu, Busan, and around 00 on the same day at around 09:0 and around 16:40 on the same day (in front of the ○○○ election campaign office). Accordingly, Defendant ○○, ○○, ○○, and ○○, and ○○ and ○○○ and ○○○ in sequence, conspired in order with each other, posted materials to influence the election from 180 days before the election day to the election day.

3. Defendant friendly ○○

No person shall slander a candidate (including a person who intends to become a candidate), his/her spouse, lineal ascendant or descendant, or sibling by openly pointing out facts through a speech, broadcast, newspaper, mail, magazine, poster, propaganda document, or any other means, with the intention of having him/her elected or having another person elected or not to be elected.

A. The crime committed on February 8, 2012

On February 8, 2012, at around 21:07, Defendant 1 sent a message to his mobile phone (010-4855-0*) Kim Young-gu’s mobile phone (010-9147-3**) which is the electorate in Busan, using his mobile phone (010-485-0*) to the mobile phone (05-0*) of Kim Young-gu’s mobile phone (010-9147-3**) which is the electorate in Busan, along with an influoral female photograph, the chairman of the ○○○ Elementary Operation Committee was the chairman of the 00 hospital before 7 years ago, who was divorced from her husband and was divorced from her husband, who was the principal of the fluoral at 00 hospital, and then called “whether he was aware that she is a woman who is a party to the ○○○ sexual intercourse?” Accordingly, the above Defendant abused the 19th preliminary candidate by openly pointing out the fact that ○○ was not elected.

(b) The crime of March 9, 2012;

On March 9, 2012, Defendant 1 posted a statement that “Isk, Isk, Isk, Isn, Isk, Isk, Isk, Isk, kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn's kn'.

4. Defendant Oral ○○

No person shall slander a candidate (including a person who intends to become a candidate), his/her spouse, lineal ascendant or descendant, or sibling by openly pointing out facts through a speech, broadcast, newspaper, mail, magazine, poster, propaganda document, or any other means, with the intention of having him/her elected or having another person elected or not to be elected.

On February 10, 2012, Defendant 00, as a volunteer of 00 ○○○○○○○○’s National Assembly member, Defendant 1, at his house located in Suwon-dong, Busan, 000 apartment units 00 000 dong, and called “(defluence).” On February 4, 200, Defendant 2, as a member of the ○○○○○○○ National Assembly, had been pregnant with the above 0-dong 20-dong 20-dong 30-dong 200-dong 00 dong 200-dong 200-dong 200-dong 200-dong 200-dong 200-dong 200-dong 200-dong 300-dong 200-dong 200-dong 200-dong 700-dong 200-dong 700-dong 200-dong 700-dong 2000.

Summary of Evidence

【Each point of Section 1 at the Time of Sales】

1. Each part of the statements made by Defendant KimO or UOO at this Court; 1. The statements made by the witness ○○, Cho○○, Ha○○, Ha○○, Ma○○, Ma○○, Ma○○, and Ma○○○ in this Court; 1. Part of the statements made by the witness ○○ and Kim○ in this Court; 1. Each part of the statements made by the prosecutor and the police prepared by each of the suspect interrogation committees on Defendant Kim○, and Ma○○.

1. Each statement (including attached documents) written by the prosecutor about 00, NoO (the head of the Gu simultaneously), and Park 00 (O prior to the opening of the name) of each written statement prepared by the prosecutor;

1. Each statement written by the police officer on the red ○○, KimO, and leap○○; and

1. Each description (including attached documents) of the complaint(s) for the preparation of the ○○○○ book and of the additional complaint(s)

1. Entry in a written accusation (including attached documents) in the preparation of Kim○○○;

1. Each recording of a record of the preparation of a record by the prosecution (including attached documents);

1. 검찰 작성의 각 수사보고서[김○○ 전 남편 진술 요점 및 진술 녹음 CD 첨부 / 피의자 김00, 유○○ 주요 통화 내역 첨부 보고 / 김○○가 국회에서 기자회견을 하였던 3. 19. 전후의 행적에 대한 보고 / 피의자 김○○에 대한 영상녹화조사 CD 첨부 보고(증거순번 152) / 피의자 유○○에 대한 영상녹화조사 CD 첨부 보고 / 김○○, 유○○, 김○○, 조○○, 박○○, 제○○ 주요 통화내역 첨부 보고 | 휴대전화 발신 통화내역 분석 자료 첨부 / 현장확인 결과보고 - 김○○, 유○○ 만난 장소 등 / 피의자 김OO, 유○○에 대한 영상녹화조사 CD 첨부 보고 / 피의자 김○○ 기자회견 내용 녹취 보고 / 영상 녹화 조사 CD 첨부 보고(증거순번 200) / 피의자 김○○에 대한 영상녹화 조사 CD 첨부 보고(증거순번 211) / 피의자 김○○의 학부모회장 재임기간 확인 보고 / 피의자 김○○의 식당 운영기간 확인 보고 / ○○초등학교 2003년도 학부모회 총회 회의록 사본 첨부 보고 / 영상 녹화 조사 CD 첨부 보고(증거순번 220) / 피의자 김○○에 대한 영상녹화 조사 CD 첨부 보고(증거순번 233) / 유○○ 면담결과 보고서 / 2004년도경 유○○ 가족 소유 차량 확인 보고 / ○○초등학교 연혁지 사본 첨부 등 보고]의 각 기재 내지 영상(첨부 서류 포함)

1. Each investigation report prepared by the police (Attachment of articles, such as the newspaper, etc. related to this case / The investigation by the head of the Suwon-gu Office / the submission of a medical record of suspect Kim 00 / the submission of a copy of the certificate of hospitalization / the list of the head of the Gu in Suwon-gu and the investigation by the head of the office of office in office / In-house / In-house / In-house / In-house / In-house / In-house / In-house / General (Evidence No. 82), investigation by the head of the office of office in office in office / In-house / General (Evidence No. 82),

1. A statement (including attached documents) of a reply (facsimile) to a request for cooperation in investigation by the Busan Southern Police Station, prepared by the Secretary General for ○○○○○○○

1. A copy of a note (Evidence No. 1, No. 142 of the Evidence Record), each of the transmission of ○○○ and radio transmitter on February 21, 2012 from February 10 to February 21, 2012 (Evidence No. 1, No. 862-866 of the Evidence Record), Kim00, and each of the sending details (Evidence No. 1, No. 867-872 of the Evidence Record)

1. Each image of each photograph (Evidence No. 234-238, a document of evidence);

【Each point of Section 2 at the Time of Sales】

1. Each part of the statements made by the Defendant ○○, Ma○, and Ma○○ in this Court; 1. Some of the statements made by the prosecution and the police in each protocol of interrogation of the suspect about the Defendant Ma○○, Ma○, and Ma○○, and Ma○○ (including attached documents)

1. Entry of each protocol of examination of suspect about ○○○ and Lee ○○ in the police preparation; and

1. Statement of statement made by the police Kim ○-○ of the police preparation;

1. Statement on the sex of the police preparation (2) ;

1. Each report on internal investigation (with respect to telephone conversations Nos. / (general), -000-000-0000 and telephone conversations) made by the police recording and video (including accompanying documents);

1. 경찰 작성의 각 수사보고[(일반)-우○○의 카톡 사진자료 출력하여 첨부 | 신문기사 첨부에 대한]의 각 기재 및 영상(첨부 서류 포함)

1. Videos of photographs (Evidence No. 5, No. 19);

【Each point of No. 3 at the Time of Sales】

1. Part of the statement made by Defendant ○○ in this court; 1. Part of each protocol of interrogation of the suspect about Defendant ○○, which was prepared by the prosecution and the police, on each of the suspect’s interrogation records (including attached documents)

1. Statement made by the police on 00 of the written statement;

1. Statement (including attached documents) of a letter of complaint (Accusation) prepared by ○○○○;

1. Each description and image of the police investigation report (general)-Kakax transmission data attached / (general)-LO's Twitter data attached to each other) and each description and image of the police preparation;

[No. 4]

1. Part of the statement made by the defendant 00 at this court; 1. Each part of the suspect interrogation protocol prepared by the prosecutor and the police about the defendant 00, each of the suspect interrogation protocol prepared by the prosecutor and the police; 1. Each statement made by the police about 00, 00, 00, and 00

1. Statement (including attached documents) of a letter of complaint (Accusation) prepared by ○○○○;

1. Determination as to the defendant Kim 00, 00, and the defense counsel's assertion on each copy of each original document (No. 4, No. 166, No. 167 of the evidence record)

1. Whether the sixth suspect interrogation protocol prepared by the prosecution against Defendant Kim ○-○ was admissible as evidence

A. The assertion

Defendant ○○○ shall not use as evidence the 6th interrogation protocol against the Defendant, as it is impossible to recognize the voluntar and its contents, on the grounds that the prosecutor’s right to assistance of counsel was infringed and the investigator stated differently from the facts by force and interview of the investigator.

B. Determination

(1) In a case where the defendant asserts that the testimony of the defendant as stated in the suspect interrogation protocol is a false confession, the court shall determine whether the above statement was made at will by free conviction in consideration of various circumstances, such as the defendant’s educational background, career, occupation, social status, intelligence, the content of the statement, and the form of the protocol in the suspect interrogation protocol, etc. according to the specific case. However, the court shall determine the credibility of the statement in consideration of the following: (a) whether the contents of the confession per se have objective rationality; (b) the motive and reason for the confession; (c) what is the motive and reason for the confession; and (d) the circumstances leading to the confession, other than circumstantial evidence other than the confession, are either contrary to or contradictory to the confession (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1603, Oct. 27

(2) 살피건대, 앞서 적법하게 채택한 증거들 및 이 사건 변론과정에 현출된 자료에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정들, 즉 ① 피고인 김○○는 대학을 졸업한 사람으로서, 2003. 4. 9.경부터 2004. 2. 29.경까지 부산 수영구 ○○동에 있는 ○○초등학교의 학부모회 회장을 맡아 활동하였으며, 2003. 9. 30.경부터 2004. 7. 2.경까지 '○○○'라는 상호로 선술집을 운영하기도 하였고, 2004년 후반기부터 창원시로 가기 전까지 ○○ 대학교 부근에 있던 도박게임 오락실에서 경리업무와 환전 등 매장 관리를 총괄하는 일에 종사하기도 하였으며, 창원시로 가서는 주점의 지배인으로 일하기도 하였고, 현재는 창원시에서 부동산중개사무소 사무원으로 일하고 있는바, 이에 의하면 위 피고인은 고등교육을 받은 정상적인 사고능력자로서 판시 제1항 기재 각 범행에 관하여 조사받을 당시 자신의 수사기관에 대한 진술이 어떠한 효과를 가지는지를 잘 알고 있었을 것으로 보이는 점, ② 위 피고인은 2012. 3. 4.자 확인서 제출 당시와 판시 제1의 가. 항기재 각 기자회견 당시에는 '유○○이 수영구청장으로 재직할 때에 자신이 유○○으로부터 성추행을 당하였고 반강제적으로 성관계를 가졌다.'고 주장하였을 뿐, 유○○과의 성관계로 인하여 임신하고 낙태하였다고는 주장하지 아니하였던 점, ③ 그 후 위 피고인은 경찰에서부터 검찰에서의 제5회 피의자신문 시까지는 '자신이 ○○초등학교 학부모회 회장으로 재직할 당시인 2004. 4.경 ○○초등학교의 마사토 공사건과 관련하여 수영구청으로부터 예산을 배정받기 위하여 혼자 구청장실을 방문하였다가 성추행을 당하였으며, 2004. 7.경과 2004. 8.경 상호 불상의 모텔에서 반강제적으로 성관계를 당하였고, 그 후 유○○의 아이를 임신하게 된 것 같아 낙태하러 병원에 갔었다.'라고 진술하여 유○○과의 성관계로 인하여 임신하고 낙태하였다는 내용을 추가하였던 점, ④ 그런데 검찰의 후속 조사과정에서 위 피고인이 ○○초등학교 학부모회 회장으로 재직하였던 기간이 2003. 4. 9.경부터 2004. 2. 29.경까지이고, ○○초등학교에 마사토 공사가 있었던 시기는 2003. 9. 25.경이며, 위 피고인이 2004. 10. 4. 내원한 ○○병원의 의료기록에 따르면 위 피고인의 마지막 생리일이 2004. 8. 20.경이고 태아는 6주 상태였음이 밝혀져, 위 피고인이 수영구청장실을 혼자 방문하고 유○○을 계속 만나게 된 경위에 관한 주장이 사실관계와 배치되고, 위 피고인이 임신하였던 아이도 유OO의 아이일 가능성이 없다고 드러난 점, ⑤ 그러자 위 피고인은 검찰에서의 제6회 피의자신문 당시, 자신이 그때 임신한 아이는 유○○의 아이가 아니었고 유○○과 성관계를 할 당시에는 루프 시술을 하고 있어 임신이 불가능한 상태였으나, 유○○가 판시 제1의 나. 항 기재 고발장을 작성할 때에 "유○○이 밉지도 않느냐. 이렇게 하면(임신, 낙태, 이혼 내용을 적으면) 유을 더 확실히 보낼 수 있다."고 말을 하였고, 자신도 입원확인서 상의 수술날짜를 보니 유○○을 만나던 시기와 얼추 비슷하고 지금에 와서 유00의 아이인지 여부를 확인할 수 없을 것이라는 생각에 유○○이 미운 마음이 들어 고발장에 그렇게 기재를 하였으며, 자신이 한 말이 자신을 옭아매서 자꾸 거짓말을 하게 된 것으로, 최초 확인서(2012. 3. 4.자)에 기재된 내용이 사실이라는 취지로 진술하였던 점 등을 종합하여 보면, 검찰 작성의 위 피고인에 대한 제6회 피의자신문조서에 기재된 위 피고인의 임신 및 낙태와 관련한 자백의 진술 내용 자체는 객관적인 합리성을 띠고 있고, 위 자백의 동기나 이유 및 위 자백에 이르게 된 경위에 아무런 하자가 발견되지 아니할 뿐 아니라 위 피고인의 위 자백과 저촉되거나 모순되는 정황증거도 없으므로, 위 피고인의 위 자백은 그 신빙성이 있다.

Therefore, we cannot accept the above argument of Defendant Kim ○○.

2. As to the 1-A of the holding (as to the violation of the Public Official Election Act)

A. The assertion

Although it is recognized that Defendant ○○○○, and ○○○, committed each act listed in Article 1-A(a) of the decision, it constitutes a case where he informs the relevant persons of serious contents related to the quality of National Assembly members who require strict ethics and morality, and thus, illegality is excluded by the proviso of Article 251 of the Public Official Election Act.

B. Determination

(1) Slanders prohibited by Article 251 of the Public Official Election Act refer to acts of slandering a candidate or a political party to which he/she belongs by pointing out specific facts about a candidate or a political party, regardless of false or true facts, and the expression or evaluation of abstract facts without physical constitution does not constitute a factual expression as mentioned above (see Supreme Court Decision 84Do554, May 29, 1984).

Meanwhile, in order for the public allegation of facts under the main sentence of Article 251 of the Public Official Election Act to be dismissed under the proviso of Article 251 of the Public Official Election Act, the first statement should be considered as a whole to conform to the truth; second, its contents are objectively related to the public interest; third, an actor is required to have the motive to indicate the fact for the public interest. However, even if the public interest is not required to be superior to the private interest, if it is merely a nominal motive compared to the private interest, and it is only incidental to the public interest, it cannot be considered as a public interest (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Do168, Mar. 10, 201).

(2) In order to determine whether illegality under the proviso of Article 251 of the Public Official Election Act is dismissed, it is necessary to specifically and specifically confirm the alleged facts and to examine the authenticity and public interest of the above Defendants.

According to the evidence duly adopted earlier, the above Defendants publicly stated the following facts: “Defendant Kim ○○ was sexually indecent at the head of the Gu office at the time of his/her employment in the head of Si/Gun/Gu, and later, he/she was forced to sexually sexual intercourse with the head of Si/Gun/Gu.”

(3) 위 피고인들이 적시한 위 사실들이 진실인지 여부에 관하여 보건대, (가) 아래의 유○○에 대한 『무죄 부분의 판단에서 보듯이 위 피고인들의 각 진술, 위 피고인들 및 유○○에 대한 각 거짓말탐지기검사 결과 회신, 증인 김영근의 진술만으로 '피고인 김○○가 유00으로부터 성추행을 당하였고, 그 후 유○○과 반강제적으로 성관계를 가졌다.'고 인정하기 부족하고, 달리 이를 인정할 증거가 없으며, (나) 설령 '피고인 김00가 유00과 성관계를 가진 사실'이 있다고 하더라도, 앞서 적법하게 채택한 증거들에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정들, 즉 ① 피고인 유○○는 2012. 2. 20.경 별다른 교류 없이 지내던 피고인 김○○가 거주하고 있는 창원시로 찾아가 김00과 함께 만났고, 그때부터 피고인 김○○에게 "유○○이 2008년에 무혐의로 풀려났다고 주장한다."고 말하면서 직접 나서도록 적극적으로 부추겼고, 그에 따라 피고인 김○○는 피고인 유00 및 김○○과 함께 있는 자리에서 2012. 3. 4.자 확인서를 작성하여 000당 공심위에 제출한 점, ② 피고인 김○○는, 피고인 유○○로부터 "유○○이 2008년 언니(피고인 김OO)와의 관계로 인해 조사를 받은 적이 있는데 무혐의로 풀려났다. 아직도 그런 일로 소문이 돈다."라는 말을 듣고, 자신은 조사를 받은 적도 없고 옛날 생각에 화도 나고 억울하고 분통이 터지고 하여 "내가 이것을 어떻게 해 볼 방법이 없냐?"고 하니, 피고인 유○○가 진정서를 써보라고 하기에 2012. 3. 4.자 확인서를 쓰게 되었다.」라는 취지로 진술하고 있는 점, ③ 피고인 김○○는, 「위 확인서의 내용이 언론에 보도된 후 유○○이 기자회견을 열어 '2008년도에 허위사실로 확인되었다.'고 하며 무고함을 주장하면서 삭발을 하는 등 자신을 가공의 인물로 만드는 것에 화가 나서 피고인 유○○에게 전화하여 "뭐 어떻게 할 수 없느냐?"라고 물었더니 여성단체를 소개시켜 주었고, '유○○도 그러는데 나도 확 까발려버릴까?' 하는 생각으로 첫 번째 기자회견을 하게 된 것이다.」 라는 취지로 진술하고 있는 점, ④ 피고인 김○○는, 「그 후에도 연일 '유○○이 피고인 김○○가 거짓말을 하고 있고, 박○○ 측의 시나리오에 의한 것이라고 주장한다.'라는 내용의 기사가 나오자, 자신이 화가 나서 뭔가 행동을 하기 위하여 상의를 하려고 피고인 유○○를 만나러 갔고, '한번 맛을 보여줘야겠다. 이왕 터트리는 거 세게 한번 가야겠다.'라는 생각에 국회의사당에 가서 두 번째 기자회견을 하게 된 것이다.」라는 취지로 진술하고 있는 점, ⑤ 피고인 김○○가 2012. 3. 4.자 확인서를 작성하고 판시 제1의 가.항 기재 각 기자회견을 함에 있어 긴밀히 연락을 주고받거나 동행하기도 하였던 피고인 유OO(제18대 국회의원선거에서 박OO 후보의 선거운동원으로 활동), 김○○(박○○ 후보의 부인인 조현의 지인), 제○○(박○○ 후보의 보좌관), 박○○(박○○ 후보의 수행비서)은 모두 박○○ 후보 측의 인사이고, 판시 제2 내지 4항의 범행 주체인 우00(박OO 후보의 자원봉사자)과 오00(박OO 후보의 자원봉사자)도 박○○ 후보의 지지자인 점 등을 종합하여 보면, 피고인 김○○의 위 각 기자회견은 위 피고인이 유○○에 대하여 개인적인 감정으로 화가 나서 한 행동으로 보이고, 피고인 유○○는 유○○의 경쟁자인 박○○ 후보 측에 서서 유○○으로 하여금 정당 공천을 받지 못하도록 하거나 국회의원에 당선되지 못하게 할 목적으로 한 행동으로 보일 뿐, 위 피고인들이 단순히 제19대 국회의원선거의 (예비)후보자인 유이 O의 국회의원으로서의 적격성과 자질에 관한 의견의 개진이라는 공공의 이익을 위하여 위 각 기자회견을 하였다고 보기 어렵다(위 피고인들에게 그 주장과 같은 공공의 이익을 위한 동기가 있었다고 하더라도 사적 이익과 비교하여 공공의 이익은 명목상 동기에 불과하여 부수적인 데 지나지 않는다고 할 것이다).

Therefore, the above Defendants’ above assertion is rejected.

3. As to the point of No. 1-B of the holding (non-section)

A. The assertion

In the first place, the argument about the pregnancy and abortion of Defendant KimO-O or UOO is not false, and in the first place, even if the above argument is false, as long as Defendant KimO-O was committed with sexual assault and sexual assault several times from his U.S. ○○, it constitutes a case of exaggeration of the issue, and thus, it does not constitute a crime of false accusation in legal principles.

B. Determination

(1) The crime of health care or false accusation is established when another person reports false facts to a public office or a public official for the purpose of having a criminal or disciplinary punishment imposed upon him/her. Even if a part of the reported fact contains false facts, it is not an important part that affects the establishment of a crime, but it does not constitute a crime of false accusation if the reported fact is merely exaggerated (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Do5939, Jan. 24, 2003).

(2) As seen in paragraph (1) above, confessions related to the pregnancy and abortion of the above defendant stated in the 6th arrest report against the defendant Kim ○ in the prosecutor's office's letter of self-determination as stated in paragraph (1) are reliable. If the confessions by the defendant Kim ○ and the records of medical records (the last birth date of the above defendant and the growth of the fetus), which are the evidence duly adopted earlier, are combined with the confessions by the defendant Kim○○ and the records of medical records (the last birth date of the defendant's last birth and the growth of the fetus) are combined, all of the arguments by the defendant Kim○'s ○, and the arguments by the defendant ○○, which are based on them, are false. The above false facts are not merely an exaggeration of a matter but also an important part that affects the establishment of the Public Official Election Act due to the publication of false facts

따라서 위 피고인들 측의 위 주장도 받아들이지 아니한다. 피고인 우oo, 조ㅇㅇ, 정ㅇㅇ 및 피고인 정ㅇㅇ의 변호인의 주장에 관한 판단

1. As to the second decision of the court below in friendly00, 100, and 100

A. The assertion

(1) Defendant 1’s assertion

As stated in the judgment, Pocket and block do not relate to the 19th National Assembly election, but only sought a person who will wear the above Pocket and block on the ground that ○○ intends to publicize the name products he plans.

(2) Defendant 1’s assertion

As stated in the judgment, the Paz and booms are not made upon the Do○○○’s request, and there is no content that slanders by pointing out Do○○, and there is a plan to sell Titrts on the Busan Seashore, which is produced in advance to cause a sense of good (e.g., Titts).

(3) Defendant 1’s assertion

Because it is not possible to read the Korean language, the contents of the name in the Paves and booms in the ruling are related to the election of the 19th National Assembly members.

B. Determination

Defendant 1 and ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○’s act of using the above evidence, was a person who supported the ○○○○○○○○’s election campaign office at the time of the 18th National Assembly member’s election (or was aware of the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○’s election campaign office’s election campaign office’s election campaign office’s election campaign office’s charge). As such, the time when the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○’s act of using the above ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○’s election campaign’s testimony was widely spread to the media, the said Defendants appears to have been aware of the above ○○○○○’s election campaign’s content and method of advertising, and thus, it appears that the ○○○○○’s election campaign.

Therefore, each of the above defendants' arguments is rejected.

2. As to the 3-A-A-O's decision

A. The assertion

In order to confirm whether the question is true against Kim 00, a long time point of view, the contents and photographs as described in the 3-A. A. as described in the ruling, were sent using the Kakakao Kakao A., and there was no intention to slander ○○.

B. Determination

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted as follows, i.e., (i) Defendant Ma○○ was a volunteer for Park○○○○○ candidate; (ii) Defendant ○○ was aware of the above Defendant to the Secretariat of the election campaign office for Park○○○○ candidate; (iii) Kim○ was a parent of the ○ Elementary School; and Kim○ was a parent of the ○○ Elementary School; (iv) Defendant ○○ was a parent of the ○○ Elementary School; (iii) the above Defendant did not appear to have been in the position to confirm the truth of the above Defendant; and (iv) the above Defendant sent a female photograph to Kim○○○ and ○○○○○, including Kim○, as a party to the said lawsuit without verifying the authenticity of the lawsuit; and (iv) it was sufficiently recognized that the aforementioned Defendant’s testimony related to the O’s sexual intercourse was spread to several persons due to the above Defendant’s crime; and (v) the Defendant’s statement was made to the effect that it was against the ○○○ residents at the time of the investigation.

Therefore, the above defendant's above assertion cannot be accepted.

3. As to the third-B of the judgment of the defendant friendly 00

A. The assertion

The contents that were reported in newspapers or from volunteers are merely posted on the Twitter, and the "YOU" is not referred to as a specific candidate, and there was no intention to slander ○○○.

B. Determination

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted as follows, namely, (i) Defendant 10 was aware of the fact that he was a volunteer of Park ○○○○○ candidate at the time of the crime, and (ii) the above Defendant stated to the effect that “the fact about the sexual suspicion of 00 is stated at the time of the investigation by the prosecutor’s office,” “the person in charge of the above contents will naturally be subject to anti-compact on ○○○.” (iii) At the time of the crime, the above Defendant’s Twitter’s selling was 361, 1,453, and 1,453, and there was a very high possibility of spreading due to the characteristics of the SNS media, it is sufficiently recognized that the Defendant had the intention to slander ○○ at the time of committing the crime as stated in Article 3(b) of the above judgment.

Therefore, we cannot accept the above argument of the above defendant. Determination on the defendant O○○'s argument

1. The assertion;

A. It is difficult to listen to the stories of women who are not standing in the next place at the Seas' office of the Seas' office and to confirm the authenticity of the ○○’s sexual impulses’ sexual intercourse, and thus, no intention was intended to defame ○○, or ○○ was intended to prevent election.

B. Upon completion of the written petition, it was thought that the said written petition was submitted to the ○○○○○ Party. However, at the next day, the said written petition was presented to 00 and the same content as the press was reported, and it was no longer necessary to submit it to the public trial for 000s. As such, the said written petition is not completed, and thus, it should be deemed that it was destroyed.

2. Determination:

A. “The purpose of preventing a candidate from being elected” under the main sentence of Article 251 of the Public Official Election Act is to be sufficient when there is a dolusent perception without having to be active or conclusive recognition. Whether there was such purpose ought to be determined reasonably in light of social norms by comprehensively taking into account various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s social status, personal relation with the Defendant and the candidate for a candidate or competition, motive and details, means, and method of the act, details and manner of the act, nature and extent of the other party, social situation at the time of the act, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Do168, Mar. 10, 201).

B. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted earlier, i.e., (1) the defendant was a volunteer for ○○○ candidate in the 19th National Assembly election; (2) the above defendant stated that he was willing to receive signature from those who know about ○○○'s sexual background and submitted it to the public peace; and ○○○○○, an assistant to ○○○, stated that the above defendant obtained such signature from the above defendant in order to obtain signature as above, and that the above defendant did not have any substantial influence on the evaluation of the above 0th public prosecutor's 's 0th public prosecutor's 0th public prosecutor's 6th public prosecutor's 0th public prosecutor's 0th public prosecutor's 0th public prosecutor's 0th public prosecutor's 6th public prosecutor's 0th public prosecutor's 0th public prosecutor's 6th public prosecutor's 0th public prosecutor's 0th public prosecutor's 6th public prosecutor's 6th public prosecutor's 6th public prosecutor's 6th public prosecutor's 6th public prosecutor's 6th public prosecutor's 200.

Therefore, the above defendant's above assertion cannot be accepted.

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 251 of the Public Official Election Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, respectively.

○ Decision 1-B: Articles 156 and 30 of the Criminal Code

Article 256 (2) 1 (h), Article 90 (1) 1 of the Public Official Election Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act

Article 256 (2) 1 (h) and Article 90 (1) 2 of the Public Official Election Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act

○ Each point of the third decision: the main text of Article 251 of the Public Official Election Act

○ Decision 4: Main text of Article 251 of the Public Official Election Act

1. Commercial competition;

○ Defendant MaO, Cho 00, and MadO: Articles 40 and 50 of each Criminal Act (Punishments imposed on the violation of the Public Official Election Act due to posting of advertisements with heavy criminal circumstances)

1. Selection of punishment;

Each fine for a violation of each Public Official Election Act, and each choice of imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of false accusation.

1. Separation of concurrent crimes;

Defendant Kim ○-○ and U.S. ○: each of the provisions of Article 18(3) and 18(1)3 of the Public Official Election Act (each of the provisions of the Public Official Election Act and each of the crimes without accusation)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

(a) Defendant KimO, U.S. 00: Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 (with respect to each crime set forth in Article 1-A (2) of the holding, among the concurrent crimes set forth in Article 1-A (2) of the holding that each crime is heavier) of the Criminal Code, or Articles 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 (Concurrent Crimes with Punishment set forth in Article 3-2 of the holding that each crime is largest) of the Criminal Code

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Defendant ○○○, ○○, Ma○, Ma○, OO, and Ma○○: Articles 70 and 69(2) of each Criminal Act (as to each fine on Defendant Kim○, and on Defendant Kim○, and on Defendant ○○)

1. Suspension of execution;

○ Defendant KimO: Article 62(1) and (2) of the Criminal Act (with respect to imprisonment, taking into account the favorable circumstances among the reasons for the following sentencing)

1. Order of provisional payment;

○ Defendant KimO, UO, UO, OO, O0, and SOO: Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (as to each fine in respect of Defendant Kim○, UO, and UO)

1. Suspension of sentence;

○ Defendant 200: Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (The following circumstances are considered as favorable to the reasons for sentencing)

[Suspension of Imposition of Sentence: 400,000 won of fine: The reason for sentencing Articles 70 and 69(2) (50,000 won a day) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendant Kim 00

(a) Each crime under subparagraph 1-A of the holding;

The above criminal facts against Defendant Kim 00 constitute concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act among the crimes for which sentencing guidelines are set.

[Scope of Punishment by Law] Fine of KRW 50,000 to KRW 7,500,000 【Basic Crimes】 The crime under Article 1-A-2(2) of the Judgment

[Determination of Type] Publication of False Information, Prohibition of Candidates, 1 (Prohibition of Candidates)

[Special Aggravations] - Aggravations: very serious importance of electorates on the evaluation of candidates' false facts or slanders.

Where it is related to the matters requiring judgment, if the other party is considerably majority or highly radio wave, the method of crime is extremely poor.

[Scope of Recommendation for Special Adjustment] Heavy Area, Fine of 2.5 million won to 6 million won

[Generally Convicted Persons] - Punishments: Crimes under Article 1-1 (1) of the Decision 1-1 of the Criminal Procedure Act

[Determination of Type] Publication of False Information, Prohibition of Candidates, 1 (Prohibition of Candidates)

[Special Aggravations] - Aggravations: very serious importance of electorates on the evaluation of candidates' false facts or slanders.

Where it is related to the matters requiring judgment, if the other party is considerably majority or highly radio wave, the method of crime is extremely poor.

[Scope of Recommendation for Special Adjustment] Aggravation, 2.5 million won to 6 million won

[General person who has no record of criminal punishment] - Fines 2.5 million won to 7.5 million won (the above shall be limited to the punishment by law)

[Determination of Sentence] Fine of 2 million won

B. 1 month to 10 years of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime No. 1-B of the holding

【Determination of Punishments ] Macie, No. 1 (General Dismissals)

[Scope of Recommendation] Basic Field, 6 months to 2 years

[General Convicts] - Reductions: No record of criminal punishment

[Criteria for Suspension of Execution] Main reasons for affirmative participation: No history of criminal punishment

[2] Each of the crimes of this case for 2 years of suspended sentence for 6 months of imprisonment with prison labor for a sentence was accused of committing each of the crimes of this case by stating specific facts that the above defendant had a relation with the 19th National Assembly member openly with the 00th National Assembly member through a press dog for the purpose of preventing him/her from being elected or getting him/her not to be elected. Furthermore, the candidate’s defamation is not only unfavorable to a specific candidate, but also impairing the fairness and transparency of the election, which is the foundation of free democracy by affecting the right decision-making or judgment of the voters, and thus, the crime of this case is somewhat complicated. However, the above defendant, which is a somewhat different character, seems to have committed each of the crimes of this case by neglecting the support of the candidate for the 00th National Assembly member, and the above defendant has no criminal record, and the above defendant has no criminal record, taking into account his/her age favorable to the above defendant, the motive and scope of the crime of this case, and taking into account various circumstances of the crime of this case, etc.

2. Defendant ○○○

(a) Each crime under subparagraph 1-a (a) of the holding;

The above criminal facts against Defendant ○○ constitute concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act among the crimes for which sentencing guidelines are set.

[Scope of Punishment by Law] Crimes of Article 1-A-2(2) of the Judgment on Basic Crimes of 50,000 won to 7.5 million won

[Determination of Type] Publication of False Information, Prohibition of Candidates, 1 (Prohibition of Candidates)

[Special Aggravations] - Aggravations: very serious importance of electorates on the evaluation of candidates' false facts or slanders.

Where it is related to the matters requiring judgment, if the other party is considerably majority or highly radio wave, the method of crime is extremely poor.

[Scope of Recommendation for Special Adjustment] Aggravation, 2.5 million won to 6 million won

[Generally Convicted Persons] - Punishments: Crimes under Article 1-1 (1) of the Decision 1-1 of the Criminal Procedure Act

[Determination of Type] Publication of False Information, Prohibition of Candidates, 1 (Prohibition of Candidates)

[Special Convicted Persons] and Aggravations: very serious importance of electorates on the evaluation of candidates' false facts or slanders.

Where it is related to the matters requiring judgment, if the other party is considerably majority or highly radio wave, the method of crime is extremely poor.

[Scope of Recommendation for Special Adjustment] Aggravation, 2.5 million won to 6 million won

[General person who has no record of criminal punishment] - Fines 2.5 million won to 7.5 million won (the above shall be limited to the punishment by law)

(Pronouncement of Punishment) Fine of 2.5 million won

B. 1 month to 10 years of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of 1-B of the holding

【Determination of Punishments ] Macie, No. 1 (General Dismissals)

[Scope of Recommendation] Basic Field, 6 months to 2 years

[General Convicts] - Reductions: No record of criminal punishment

[Pronouncement Decision of Punishment] Each of the crimes of this case committed for 6 months in 19th National Assembly members with no interest in the election of the 19th National Assembly members, and the crime of this case was committed by the ○○○○○ by openly reporting to the 19th National Assembly members of the 18th National Assembly or by reporting to the 19th National Assembly members of the 19th National Assembly, for the purpose of preventing him from being elected, or preventing him from being elected, on two occasions or more occasions, by pointing out the specific facts that ○○ was in an inhuman relationship with Kim○○, and by inducing him to commit a criminal punishment. As such, the slander against the candidate is not only unfavorable to a specific candidate, but also detrimental to the fairness and transparency of the election, which constitutes the basis of free democracy, by affecting the right decision-making or judgment of the voters, and the crime was not easy. In the election of the 18th National Assembly members, the above defendant did not seem to have been punished for the above ○○ National Assembly member of the 19th National Assembly member of this case.

The fact that the above defendant had no criminal record seems to be favorable to the above defendant.

In such circumstances, the punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into account all the circumstances, such as the age, character and conduct of the above defendant, motive of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, which are conditions for sentencing specified in the pleadings of this case.

3. Each criminal facts against Defendant ○○○○○○○○ constitutes concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act among the crimes under Article 3 of the Criminal Act, on which the sentencing guidelines set out, and the crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, on which no sentencing guidelines have been set. The scope of a fine under the law)

【Article 3-2(b) of the Presidential Decree】

【Determination of Type】 Publication of False Information, Prohibition of Candidates, and Type 1 (Prohibition of Candidates)

[Special Aggravations] - Aggravations: very serious importance of electorates on the evaluation of candidates' false facts or slanders.

In the case related to the matters requiring determination, where the other party is considerably majority or highly radio wave (the scope of recommendation for special adjustment), the subject of aggravated punishment, a fine of 2.5 million won to 6 million won.

【No. 3-A.m.】

【Determination of Type】 Publication of False Information, Prohibition of Candidates, and Type 1 (Prohibition of Candidates)

[Special Aggravations] - Aggravations: very serious importance of electorates on the evaluation of candidates' false facts or slanders.

cases related to the required determination;

- Mitigation elements: Where the other party is small or low radio wave;

[Scope of Recommendation] Basic area, fine of one million won or three million won to 2.5 million won 【Pronouncement Decision of Punishment】 Each of the crimes of this case committed by the above defendant was posted a cell phone or twitter for the purpose of prohibiting the success of a political party by using the candidate for the 19th National Assembly election as the candidate for the 19th National Assembly member, or for preventing the election from being elected, by openly pointing out specific facts that the 00 openly was in a secret relationship with Kim ○ and twitter, thereby slandering the ○○ and by analogying the ○○○○, which can be inferred about the ○○○. As such, the slander against the candidate is not only disadvantageous to a specific candidate, but also impairing the fairness and transparency of the election, which constitutes the basis of free democracy, by affecting the right decision-making or decision-making by the voters. Thus

The fact that the above defendant has no criminal record heavier than the fine seems to be beneficial to the above defendant.

In such circumstances, the punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into account all the circumstances, such as the age, character and conduct of the above defendant, motive of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, which are conditions for sentencing specified in the pleadings of this case.

4. Defendant’s mistake [the scope of punishment by law] fine of 50,000 to 4 million won

[Determination of Punishment] Election Offense, Publication of False Facts, Slanders for Candidates, 1 (Slanders for Candidates)

[Special Aggravations] - Aggravations: Where the content of defamation is related to the very important matters of the electorate on the evaluation of candidates.

- Reduction element: (a) where the other party is a small number or low propagation [the scope of recommending punishment] basic area; (b) a fine of one million to three million won]; and (c) the crime of this case was committed by the said accused by 1 million won, a preliminary candidate for the election of the 19th National Assembly member, with the aim of having the said accused not receive the official nomination of a political party, or preventing him from being elected, by openly pointing out specific facts with the intention to make the said accused not to receive the official nomination of a political party; and (d) a candidate’s defamation against a candidate is disadvantageous to a specific candidate; and (e) a candidate’s defamation is not only against a specific candidate, but also impairing the fairness and transparency of an election, which is the basis of free democracy, by affecting the right decision-making or decision-making of the voters

In such circumstances, the punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into account all the circumstances, such as the age, character and conduct of the above defendant, motive of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, which are conditions for sentencing specified in the pleadings of this case.

5. The crime of this case by Defendant Cho-○ [the scope of legal punishment] 50,00 won to 4 million won] The crime of this case was committed by the above Defendant 1,00 won, which is a preliminary candidate for the 19th National Assembly election, posted a ket, etc. that can be inferred about ○○, for the purpose of preventing the said Defendant from being elected by a political party, or preventing him from being elected. In light of the fact that the above Defendant brought an action against the investigative agency to the effect that the said Defendant was an advertisement for the promotion of Twitts’s selling in his name until this court, it seems that the nature and character of the crime are inferior.

The fact that the above defendant has no criminal record heavier than the fine seems to be beneficial to the above defendant.

In such circumstances, the punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into account all the circumstances, such as the age, character and conduct of the above defendant, motive of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, which are conditions for sentencing specified in the pleadings of this case.

6. An act of Defendant Jeong-○○○○’s election, even though being aware of the fact that it was related to the 19th National Assembly election, using a blick box containing the contents of slandering 00, a preliminary candidate, is subject to criticism. However, it appears that the above Defendant, who lives with daily labor, committed the instant crime in order to punish daily wages, appears to have no intention to influence the 19th National Assembly election, and the above Defendant appears to have no previous conviction, etc., taking into account the circumstances favorable to the above Defendant, such as his age, character and conduct, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., which are the conditions for sentencing specified in the argument of the instant case, and then the sentence is suspended (see, e.g., the part applicable to the suspended sentence) after selecting the Defendant as a fine (see, e., the applicable provisions of the statutes).

The part not guilty [Defendant 00]

1. Summary of the facts charged

No person shall publish or have another person publish false facts about the place of birth, status, occupation, career, property, personality, act, organization to which he/she belongs, etc. of a candidate (including a person intending to become a candidate) in favor of a candidate (including a person intending to become a candidate) by means of a speech, broadcast, newspaper, communication, magazine, magazine, or other means for the purpose of getting elected or having another person elected. Defendant 00, as the head of Suwon-gu around 2003, was aware of Kim ○, the president of the 00 elementary school parents association at the time when he/she became aware of the fact that he/she had become the president of the 00 elementary school parents association at that time, and formed an inhuman relationship with Kim○-○ from July 2003 to August 203, 203.

Nevertheless, on March 14, 2012, the above defendant held a briefing session to the effect that it is against himself/herself and Kim ○○○'s in relation to each of the certificates, etc. stated in Paragraph 1 of "crime Facts" submitted by KimO on 00.0.0, he/she did not have any various contents at the time of the head of the Gu, who had been 9:30 years ago, and submitted a false statement on his/her election. The defendant did not want to see that he/she was able to kill the 0th anniversary of the fact that he/she was able to receive the 0th anniversary of the fact that he/she was able to receive the 0th anniversary of the fact that he/she was able to receive the 0th anniversary of the fact that he/she had been able to receive the 0th anniversary of the fact that he/she had been able to do so by the 0th anniversary of the fact that he/she had been able to do so.

2. Defendant UOOO and its defense counsel’s summary of the defense counsel appointed the chairperson of the Suwon-gu Office honorary director at the time of his/her employment in the head of Suwon-gu, and thus, he/she was aware of Kim○, but there was no sexual relationship with Kim○, and there was no sexual relationship. Therefore, the content of the reporters’ opinion to the effect that “the sexual intercourse with Kim○-○ was not established and his/her sexual intercourse was distorted.”

3. Determination

A. The burden of proving the facts charged in a public health and criminal trial lies in the prosecutor’s burden of proving the facts charged, and the conviction of guilt ought to be based on the evidence with probative value sufficient for a judge to have a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true, so if there is no such evidence, even if there is no doubt as to the defendant’s guilt, it shall be determined with the benefit of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do735, Apr. 27, 2006).

In addition, in order to establish the crime of publishing false facts under Article 250(2) of the Public Official Election Act, it is necessary for a prosecutor to actively prove that the published facts are false, and the crime of publishing false facts cannot be established solely on the fact that there is no proof that the published facts are true (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do5279, Nov. 28, 2003). The above legal principle also applies to the crime of publishing false facts under Article 250(1)

B. The following evidence may be admitted as evidence that conforms to the above facts charged, but the evidence is not reliable or it is insufficient to use it as evidence of guilt as follows.

(1) Kim ○○○’s statement [the statement at ○○○○○’s Police and Prosecutor’s Office, the statement of Kim○○’s letter of confirmation, and each statement at ○○○ Kim○○’s meeting, etc.] 1. At the time of the preparation of the letter of confirmation on March 4, 2012, the Defendant came to know ○○○○○’s parents association at around 204. The Defendant, who was working for the head of the Gu, her head of the Gu, her direction or her head of the Gu, was flick and her head of the Gu, and the Defendant was her head of the Gu, and she was her head of the Gu, and she was her head of the Gu, and she was her head of the Gu, and she was her head of the Gu, and she was her head of the Gu for more than 1 year and 60,000 her first time to her head of the police station.

나아가, ① 김○○는 평일 낮에 위 피고인과 수영구청에서 가까운 곳에 위치한 ○ ○○○아파트 상가나 구 ○○○○○○ 호텔(현 ○○○○○O 호텔) 커피숍 또는 해 운대해수욕장 부근 동백섬 앞 버스정류장에서 만났고, 위 커피숍에서는 사람들이 위 피고인을 알아보고 인사도 하였다고 주장하나, 위 피고인은 2000. 6. 9.부터 2002. 6. 30.까지는 부산 수영구의 3대 민선구청장, 2002. 7. 1.부터 2006. 4. 1.까지는 부산 수영구의 4대 민선구청장으로 각 재직하였으며, 그 이전에도 3선의 부산광역시의원을 역임하였던 사람으로, 부산 수영구민 대다수는 위 피고인을 알아보았을 것임에도 평일 낮에 수영구청 인근이나 유동인구가 많은 장소에서 가족이 아닌 여자와 아무런 거리낌 없이 만나기는 어려웠을 것으로 보이는 점, ② 김○○는 위 피고인과 수영구청 밖에서 만나서 성관계를 하러 가던 날에 위 피고인이 직접 검정색 승용차를 운전해 왔다고 주장하나, 위 피고인의 수영구청장 재직 시절 관용차의 운전기사인 임○○은 관용차는 검정색 ○○○인데 위 피고인이 위 관용차를 직접 운전하는 것을 본 적이 전혀 없고, 다만 운행일지 상의 운행거리와 휘발유 양을 확인해 본 결과 차이가 나는 것으로 보아 위 피고인이 1년에 많아야 서너 번 정도 명절에 직접 운전한 적이 있는 것 같다고 진술하고 있고, 한편 위 피고인의 개인 차량은 흰색 ○○○ 또는 흰색 ○○○로 확인되는 점, ③ 김○○가 수영구청장실을 자주 방문하였다는 2003년이나 2004년 무렵 구청장실의 비서실장인 장○○(2002. 7.경 ~ 2004.4.경 근무)·노○○(2004.4.경 ~ 2004. 12.경 근무)와 비서인 송○○(2003. 2.경 ~ 2004.2.경 근무)·송○○(2004.3.경. ~ 2006. 3. 경 근무)은 김○○의 얼굴을 기억하지 못하고, 위 피고인의 퇴근 전에 먼저 퇴근하는 경우는 없었으며, 위 피고인이 수행비서를 대동하지 않고 반나절 가량 혼자 개인적인 일로 외출하는 일은 없었고, 여자 손님이 단독으로 구청장실을 방문하는 경우는 극히 드물었다는 취지로 진술하고 있는 점, ④ 김○○는 2004. 4.경 구청장실의 밀실에서 성추행을 당한 경위와 관련하여 당시 OO초등학교 학부모회 회장으로 학교의 마사토 공사건을 상의하기 위하여 갔다고 주장하나, 김○○의 ○○초등학교 학부모회 회장 임기는 2003. 4. 9.부터 2004. 2. 29.까지였고, ○○초등학교의 마사토 공사시기는 2003. 9. 25.경으로 확인되는바, 위 2004. 4.경에는 ○○초등학교의 마사토 공사가 완공된 뒤였고 김00의 학부모회 회장 임기가 끝난 뒤의 시점인 점, 5 김○○는 성추행을 당했던 구청장실의 밀실에 침대와 세면대가 함께 갖추어 있었다고 주장하나, 위 구청장실에는 침대가 놓여있는 곳과 세면대가 있는 곳의 출입문이 다르고, 위 피고인의 구청장 재직 시절 이후 벽체 등 구조를 바꾸는 수리를 한 사실은 없었던 것으로 확인되는 점, ⑥ 김○○는 2004. 7.경 처음 위 피고인과 성관계를 가졌다는 모텔의 위치 등에 대하여 1층 안내실에서 2층인가 3층까지 계단으로 걸어서 올라갔다고 주장하나, 2004년경에 위 모텔이 있는 건물의 1층에서 3층까지는 일반 상가로 그 1층은 횟집이나 폐업상태였고 위 건물의 4, 5층만이 모텔로 쓰였으며, 4층에 모텔 안내실이 있었으므로 엘리베이터를 이용하여야 이동이 가능하였을 것으로 보이는 점, ⑦ 김○○는 2004. 8.경 위 피고인과 성관계를 가진 후 1개월 20일이 지나도록 생리가 나오지 아니하여 ○○병원(김○○가 첫 번째로 내원한 병원)에 갔더니 임신 10주라고 들었다고 주장하나, 김○○가 2004. 10. 4.에 내원하여 담당의사에 의해 작성된 ○○병원(김○○가 두 번째로 내원한 병원)의 의료기록지에 의하면 김○○의 마지막 생리일은 김○○의 보고에 의하여 2004. 8. 20.로, 태아는 6주 상태라고 각 기록되어 있는바, 그 시기에 비추어 위 피고인과의 성관계로 인한 임신이었다고 볼 수 없는 점, ⑧ 김○○는 위 피고인과 2회 또는 그 이상 수차례 성관계를 가졌다고 주장하나, 김○○는 위 피고인의 별다른 신체적 특징을 기억하지 못하고 있는 점[검찰에서의 제5회 피의자신문 시에는 '두 번째 성관계를 할 때는 발기 후 삽입할 때 (전) 남편보다 (성기가) 좀 작다는 느낌이 들었다.'고, 마지막 피의자신문 시에는 '속살이 하얗고 살결이 매끄러웠다.'라고 진술하고 있을 뿐이다] 등에 비추어 보면, 그 진술 자체의 합리성이 부족하고 객관적인 정황에 반하여 쉽게 믿기 어렵다고 할 것이다.

(2) The ○○○’s statement [including the statements of the police and prosecutor’s office of the ○○○ and the written confirmation of the preparation of the ○○○○○○, etc. in the police and prosecutor’s office of the ○○○, and in this court] is merely containing the contents from Kim○○, and thus, it is difficult to believe that the ○○○’s statement is true unless he/she believed Kim○○’s statement.

(3) In order to recognize admissibility of evidence as evidence with factual relevance to the result of the examination of the false horses detection devices and Kim○-○'s statement detection devices, first, a certain psychological condition change occurs if the false horses are false, second, the psychological condition change always causes a certain physiological reaction, third, the biological reaction can be determined accurately as to whether the speech of the person is false or not. In particular, the determination of whether the last physiological reaction is false or not must be a device for accurately measuring the physiological reaction of the person who has consented to the examination of the false horses, and the description and method of the examination must be rational. Since the examiner has objective and accurate ability to read the measuring contents of the detection devices, the admissibility of evidence can not be granted to the inspector, so long as the same requirements are not met, it shall not be granted as to the results of the examination of the false devices (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 198Do285, Feb. 25, 1985).

The statement of the witness KimO in this court alone is insufficient to recognize that the above defendant satisfies all the three prerequisites, Utah-MT (Mo-CT) or the false horse detection machine prosecutor against the above defendant, which is an inspection machine for the false horse detection devices, and there is no other evidence to recognize that the prosecutor meets all the three premise requirements as above. Thus, the response of the police's false horse detection inspection result (the oil ○) cannot be accepted as evidence in light of the consistent change of the above defendant's statement, even if the defendant met such conditions, in light of the consistent change of the above defendant's oral detection devices inspection results, the response expressed in the above false horse detection devices inspection results cannot be accepted). The statement in this court of Kim Young-young, which is merely explaining the contents of the above false horse detection devices inspection results, cannot be considered as evidence of guilt.

4. Conclusion

If so, it is difficult to view that the evidence submitted by the above defendant alone was proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the facts charged, on the ground that there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge that the above defendant did not have a sexual relationship with the Mag-○, published through the above press conference, and that the sexual intercourse is false.

Therefore, the above facts charged constitute a case where there is no proof of a crime, and thus, the above defendant is acquitted pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the verdict of innocence is publicly notified pursuant to Article 58

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

The presiding judge and the highest judge;

Judges Cho Jong-chul

Judges Min Il-Gyeong

1) U.S. ○○ and Lee ○○ are co-defendants in the instant case. The pleadings are separated due to the duplicate of each indictment and the impossibility of serving a writ of summons on the trial date.

was made.

2) The title of this document constitutes “Written Statements” or the substance thereof.