logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.02.19 2018노1903
정치자금법위반등
Text

All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants A) 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as to the violation of the Political Funds Act (1) 1) , Defendant A did not have any conspiracy with Defendant B on the execution of illegal election funds, and there is no promise to repay the election funds later.

Therefore, there is no borrowing of election funds from Defendant B.

② Even if Defendant A offered the above public offering with Defendant B, Defendant A did not have the right to dispose of the election fund, so it cannot be deemed that Defendant B borrowed money.

In addition, the said money is the money transacted within the boundary of accomplices who conspired to violate the Public Official Election Act on the violation of the Restriction on Contribution Act, and it cannot be deemed as a "political fund" issued for political activities.

Therefore, Defendant A does not constitute a violation of the Political Funds Act.

(3) Even if the offense of violating the Political Funds Act is established, this is in a relationship between the crime of violating the Public Official Election Act and the legal concurrence or ordinary concurrence, and in light of the purport of the Public Official Election Act with the statute of limitations for a short of six months, the offense of violating the Political Funds Act shall also be pronounced acquitted upon the completion

(2) The Defendant A’s accusation is consistent with objective facts, and is not a false fact, inasmuch as the Defendant A promised to pay the illegal election funds later to Defendant B, and there is no money borrowed from Defendant A.

(2) Even if Defendant A borrowed money with the above promise and accordingly, Defendant A was aware of the false accusation, the crime of fraud cannot be established on the ground that Defendant A did not have any intention to acquire it from the original stage.

Therefore, Defendant A’s complaint constitutes an impossible attempt to commit an offense without accusation, and cannot be punished as an offense without accusation unless there is a provision for punishment for attempted offense.

B) The sentence sentenced by the lower court of unreasonable sentencing (Article 1-1 of the original judgment).

arrow