The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the defendant shall be the defendant for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final.

1. Progress of litigation;

A. The lower court and the lower court, prior to the sending of the case, convicted the Defendant of all the facts charged, sentenced the Defendant to six months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution.

As to the whole judgment of the court below, the defendant filed an appeal on the grounds that the sentencing was unfair, on the grounds that the defendant misjudgments the facts and the sentencing was unfair, and the court prior to the return of the case rendered a judgment dismissing all the appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor on the grounds that each appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor

B. The Supreme Court appealed to the entirety of the judgment of the court of final appeal before only the defendant was remanded, and the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the court before remanding for the following reasons.

1) The crime of violating the Agricultural Cooperative Act due to a violation of restrictions on the act of contribution by the president of an association under Articles 172(1)3 and 50-2 of the Agricultural Cooperative Act is complete after the lapse of six months from the date the relevant act was committed (Article 172(4) of the Agricultural Cooperative Act). Of the facts charged in the instant case, the violation of the Agricultural Cooperative Act was committed by the Defendant, who was in office as the head of the agricultural cooperative (hereinafter “CF”), on May 2014 when the Defendant was in office as the head of the cooperative, and on June 26, 2015, the indictment of the instant case was completed six months after the date the prosecution was instituted. As such, this part of the facts charged was completed before the prosecution was instituted.

Therefore, even though the judgment of acquittal was rendered on this point, the court below tried about the substance and sentenced the conviction after examining it, and maintained the judgment before the return.

In the judgment of the court prior to remand, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the statute of limitations.

2) The Act on Entrusted Elections by Public Organizations, Etc. (hereinafter “Entrusted Election Act”) provides that a candidate may not make a contribution during the contribution-restricted period (Article 35(1) of the Commissioned Election Act).