All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The summary of the judgment of the court below is as follows: Defendant B is a person running a restaurant as C president; Defendant A is a dentist who is a spouse of F candidate (Tparty affiliated with the 21st National Assembly member affiliated with the 21st National Assembly member affiliated with the 21st National Assembly member affiliated with the 21st National Assembly member affiliated with the 20th National Assembly member affiliated with the 21st National Assembly member affiliated with the 21st National Assembly member affiliated with the 21st National Assembly member affiliated with the 2020th election. Defendant B requested the spouse of a person who wishes to become a candidate in the election of the National Assembly member by account transfer from Defendant A as a support for holding the D Games, to make a contribution to an organization located in the relevant constituency; Defendant A was indicted as a charge of making a contribution to an organization located in the relevant constituency as above (violation of each

B. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair form) 1) The above-mentioned punishment (two million won of fine) sentenced by the lower court by the Defendants is too unreasonable, and it is unfair. 2) The above-mentioned punishment sentenced by the lower court by the prosecutor is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The relevant legal doctrine is an unreasonable sentencing case where the sentence of the lower judgment is too heavy or too minor in light of the content of the specific case.

Where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original judgment, and the sentencing of the original court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, the appellate court is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the original judgment.

On the other hand, in a case where it is deemed that the sentencing judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable limit of its discretion when comprehensively considering the factors and sentencing criteria that are the conditions of the sentencing as shown in the court below’s sentencing process, or where it is deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing judgment of the court below in full view of the materials newly discovered in the appellate court’s sentencing process, the appellate court shall reverse the unfair judgment of the court below.

Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015