2012 Do 14245 Violation of Act on Election of Public Offices (Absent to Defendant D)

Assistance in Violation of the Election Act for Public Official Titles

1. A;

2. B

3. C.

4. D;

5. E.

6. F;

7. G.

Defendant 1

Law Firm (L) H

Seoul High Court Decision 2012No 1636 decided November 1, 2012 (Separation)

April 11, 2013

all appeals shall be dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are determined.

1. Examining the reasoning for Defendant A’s appeal in light of the evidence duly adopted by the original judgment, it is justifiable to determine that all of the facts charged against Defendant A based on the same reasons as the judgment of the original court in the original judgment is guilty, and it cannot be said that there were errors in the misapprehension of legal principles regarding “election campaign,” “distribution of documents, etc. by unlawful means,” “establishment of similar institutions,” “establishment of similar institutions,” etc., by violating the legal principles on grounds of appeal, such as the grounds for appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of Defendant E’s appeal in light of evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the original judgment by the original judgment, on the grounds of Defendant E’s appeal, it is justifiable to determine that the facts of the instant public prosecution against Defendant E are recognized as guilty on the grounds as stated in the judgment below, and it cannot be said that there was an error of law by misapprehending the legal principles on mistake of law as stipulated in Article 16 of the Criminal Act, such as the assertion of the grounds of appeal.

Meanwhile, the remaining grounds of appeal are asserted only on the grounds of appeal by the defendant, or by the court below's ex officio, that there is no reason to regard the remaining grounds of appeal as grounds of appeal, and it does not constitute legitimate grounds of appeal.

3. According to the records as to Defendant B, C, D, F, and G’s appeal, Defendant did not submit a written reason of appeal within the statutory period, and Defendant did not state the reason for appeal in the petition of appeal.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Sang-hoon

Justices Shin Young-chul

Justices Kim Yong-deok

Justices Kim So-young