All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., e., e., g., e., g., e., e., g., e., g., e.,

2. Determination of sentencing is based on statutory penalty, discretionary determination that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of the first instance court that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of directness taken by our Criminal Procedure Act and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, it is reasonable to reverse the unfair judgment of the first instance court only in cases where it is deemed that the judgment of the first instance court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively considering the conditions of sentencing in the course of the first instance sentencing review and the sentencing criteria, etc., or where it is deemed unfair to maintain the first instance sentencing as it is in full view of the materials newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing review.

In the absence of such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in the absence of such exceptional circumstances.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court held the Defendants liable as follows: (a) under unfavorable circumstances; (b) a person who wishes to be a candidate for an election of public office is obligated to thoroughly observe the Public Official Election Act from the beginning of the election campaign to establish a fair election culture; (c) Defendant B made a photograph that indicates false facts that may affect the elector’s decision-making; and (d) sent it to a large number of party members; (c) Defendant A was well aware of the provisions related to the Public Official Election Act, with the experience of having been going through several elections; and (d) Defendant A took part in and participated in the act of Defendant B