All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s judgment 1) 1: (a) the Defendant, not at the time of candidate registration, used 1 million won out of the money that the Defendant paid as operating expenses at the time; (b) the Victim F voluntarily excluded the victim from his business; and (c) the victim only told H, a director of the G Foundation, who is a director of the G Foundation, and thus, cannot be deemed to have a performance. (b) The Defendant’s remarks do not constitute a false fact, but for the public interest, and thus, the illegality is dismissed.

B. The first sentence of the lower court [the suspended sentence (the suspended sentence: a fine of KRW 500,00)] and the second sentence of the lower court (the fine of KRW 500,000) are too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance against the defendant was rendered, and the defendant filed an appeal against them, respectively, and the court decided to hold the above two cases together.

However, since each crime of the first and second judgment is one of the concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, a sentence should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, the first and second judgment cannot be maintained as it is.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts

A. The confirmation document prepared on May 23, 2014, which was immediately after the occurrence of the instant case by the judgment of the first instance court, stated that the Defendant stated that “F was “F was expelled from the J as it was a person who has embezzled KRW 1 million at the time of election at the Do headquarters election.” The Defendant asserted that, at the time of investigation by the police, the Defendant did not make an embezzlement, but did not enter the office work for KRW 3 million at the time of the election, and thereby committed corruption.”