The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of mistake of facts, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the content “the election campaign bulletin of C, a candidate for the 7th nationwide City/Si/Gun election B (hereinafter “instant election campaign bulletin”) was a false fact in the fourth page of the election campaign bulletin of C, a candidate for the 7th nationwide City/Do election market (hereinafter “instant election campaign bulletin”).

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on this part of the facts charged is erroneous.

B. The sentence (one million won of a fine) imposed by the court below on the grounds of unfair sentencing is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The false fact under Article 250(1) of the Public Official Election Act refers to a matter that is not consistent with the truth, and is sufficient if the elector has a studio to the extent that it can misleads the elector to make an accurate judgment on the candidate. However, in a case where an essential part is consistent with objective facts in light of the overall purport of the published fact, there is a little difference between the truth and the truth or somewhat exaggerated expression in the detail.

Even if it is not a false fact, it cannot be viewed as false fact.

Whether an expression is false or false should be determined on the basis of the overall impression given to electors, by comprehensively taking into account the overall purport of the expression, objective contents, ordinary meaning of used words, and method of linking phrases, on the premise of an ordinary method in which the general elector deals with the expression (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do26, Mar. 12, 2009).

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2016Da333, Sept. 8, 2016). Moreover, inasmuch as the publication of false facts under Article 250(1) of the Public Official Election Act constitutes the content of the elements of a crime of publishing false facts, it constitutes the perception that the content of the actor’s intentional act is false.