(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.09.07 2017노1805 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.09.07 2017노1805

공직선거법위반등

Text

All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants 1) misunderstanding the fact that there was a violation of the Public Official Election Act and misunderstanding of the legal principles) with a view to affecting the election, even though the Defendants did not have an influence on the election of the 20th National Assembly members scheduled to be held on April 13, 2016, the lower court found the Defendants guilty of this part of the facts charged, which is erroneous in the misapprehension of the facts.

B) Although misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the legal principles as to whether the act constitutes an act of posting advertisements, the Defendants’ act does not constitute “act of posting advertisements” under Article 90(1)1 of the Public Official Election Act, the lower court found the Defendants guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the legal principles and misconceptions of facts.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants (Defendant A: fine of KRW 800,00, and fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the Prosecutor by the lower court to the Defendants is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles as to the violation of the Public Official Election Act, the Defendants alleged that the grounds for appeal in this part are the same as the grounds for appeal, and the lower court stated that “1.b. 1” in the column of “1.b. 1 of the “determination on the Defendants and their defense counsel’s assertion” in detail.

In light of the records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable.

The Defendants’ assertion on this part is without merit.

2) The lower court also argued to the same effect as the grounds for appeal on whether the Defendants constituted an act of posting advertisements, and the lower court expressed in detail the allegations in “1.b. 2 of the column for “judgment on the Defendants and their defense counsel’s assertion” and the judgment thereon.

The prior meaning of the notice is " many people."

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2017.09.28 2017노1831

-광주고등법원 (제주) 2018.02.07 2017노61

-대구고등법원 2017.03.27 2017노44

-대구고등법원 2018.02.06 2017노629

-서울고등법원 2017.01.13 2016노2432