beta
Text
The instant lawsuit is dismissed.
Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The fact that the Defendant, the representative of the B election commission, decided as the elected person in the election for the National Assembly member in the 20th constituency in the election for the National Assembly member in the 20th constituency (hereinafter referred to as the “instant election”) implemented on April 13, 2016 is significant in this court.
2. The plaintiff asserts that the election of this case is invalid for the following reasons. A.
The ballot counting period used in the election of this case constitutes an integrated system of ballot counting devices and ballot counting computers that output ballot papers, and control computers that control the ballot counting, and thus, its use is limited to special election pursuant to Article 5(1) of the Addenda of the Election of Public Officials and the Prevention of Unlawful Election Act (amended by March 16, 1994), and even if it is a computer system pursuant to Article 278 of the Election of Public Officials Act, it does not abide by procedural provisions, such as public relations for voters and consultation with political parties that form negotiating groups in the National Assembly. Thus, the election of this case cannot be deemed to have completed the valid ballot counting procedure.
B. Article 150(10) of the Public Official Election Act provides that “The serial number shall be printed on the ballot paper,” and the instant election was used a ballot paper with no serial number printed.
3. Determination
A. An election lawsuit stipulated in Articles 222 and 224 of the Public Official Election Act is a lawsuit seeking an election as a collective act and having violated the provisions regarding an election in a series of processes such as election, and thereby having influenced the result of the election, all or part of the election shall be invalidated.
The purpose of this is to legally implement elections and to properly determine the result of elections. Therefore, when the state or public organization acts against the law, it is to seek correction regardless of its own legal interest when the state or public organization acts against the law.