In a case where the Defendant: (a) completed the first-year course at the ○ University Management Administration Graduate School; (b) distributed printed matters stating “the advisor of the ○ University Management Administration Graduate School” to the electorates without having completed or completed the said management administration graduate school; and (c) did not have completed the said course, the case affirming the judgment below holding that the crime of publishing false facts under Article 250(1) of the Public Official Election Act is established even if the Defendant stated such printed matters in the “career” column, not “career”

Articles 64(1) and 250(1) of the Public Official Election Act

Supreme Court Decision 99Do307 delivered on June 11, 1999 (Gong1999Ha, 1453) Supreme Court Decision 2006Do8098 Delivered on February 23, 2007

Defendant

Defendant

Law Firm (LLC) LLC et al.

Daejeon High Court Decision 2010No347 decided October 8, 2010

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

According to Articles 250(1) and 64(1) of the Public Official Election Act, in cases where false facts are published in favor of a candidate or a person who wishes to be a candidate for the purpose of winning or causing to be elected, the crime of publishing false facts is established, and the same applies to cases where educational background is published, other than that which has completed a regular academic background and a foreign educational course equivalent thereto.

According to the facts duly established by the lower court, the Defendant only completed the first-year course at the graduate school of the management administration of ○ University, and did not have completed or completed the course at the graduate school of the management administration of ○ University. However, the Defendant distributed the instant printed materials, stating “the advisor of the general graduate school of the management administration of ○ University” to the electorate.

In light of the above facts, even if the defendant stated in the printed materials of this case the indication of "the advisor of ○ University's management administration graduate school" in the "career" column rather than " academic background", and did not state the word "gradation" or "entire", it is sufficient to indicate that the ordinary electorate would be mistaken for the defendant to have graduated or completed the regular degree course established in the above graduate school, or that he had completed the high-ranking manager course at least the above graduate school, and thus, the statement contains the meaning of academic background. Thus, the statement contains the meaning of academic background. Thus, the crime of publishing false facts under Article 250 (1) of the Public Official Election Act is established regardless of whether or not the defendant stated the academic background as "the social welfare school of ○ University" in the same column (see Supreme Court Decisions 99Do307, Jun. 11, 199; 2006Do8098, Feb. 23, 2007).

2. Regarding ground of appeal No. 2

원심판결 이유에 의하면, 원심은 그 채용 증거들에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정, 즉 이 사건 인쇄물과 명함에는 피고인의 사진이 인쇄되어 있고, 식당의 영업에는 불필요할 것으로 보이는 피고인의 경력, 학력 등이 기재되어 있으며, 큰 글씨로 “참신한 일꾼! 열정 있는 사람!”이라는 문구 또한 기재되어 있는 점, 피고인은 경로당, 어린이집 앞 및 보건소 앞 등에서 무차별적으로 이 사건 인쇄물과 명함을 배부한 점 등에 비추어 피고인이 이 사건 인쇄물과 명함을 배부한 것은 공직선거법 제93조 제1항 의 선거에 영향을 미치기 위하여 한 것이라고 판단하였다.

In light of relevant laws and records, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of law such as misunderstanding of legal principles as to Article 93 (1) of the Public Official Election Act.

3. Regarding ground of appeal No. 3

The court below acknowledged the fact that the defendant posted an advertisement containing the defendant's photograph, career, etc. in the book "2009 No. 1009 Es. 3 and held that the defendant should have an election campaign purpose in light of the circumstances as stated in its holding. In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above fact-finding and decision are just and acceptable, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the concept of election campaign.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Shin Young-chul (Presiding Justice)