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

1. The sentence of the lower court (a fine of KRW 2.5 million, Defendant B: a fine of KRW 900,000) against the Defendants in the summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable as it is too uneasible.

2. The Defendants conspired to make a false entry into the accounting report for election expenses without justifiable grounds in relation to the 7th nationwide local election campaign.

Defendant

A, as the accountant in charge of Defendant B, spent election expenses in excess of 1/200 of the restricted amount of election expenses publicly announced under the Public Official Election Act, and disbursed political funds in a way that the real name is not verified while paying political funds.

The crimes committed by these Defendants are in violation of the provisions of the Public Official Election Act and the Political Funds Act in order to ensure that the elections are held fairly in accordance with the free will of the people and democratic procedures, and to prevent the excessive and mixed elections by the election of the political parties, and their nature is not good.

Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the Defendants.

However, the defendants are suffering from their mistakes and are in depth against their depth.

Defendant

A does not seem to have reached an excessive disbursement of election expenses as planned from the beginning.

Defendant

The amount of election expenses (5,204,896 won) paid by A in excess of the restricted amount of election expenses or by means of not verifying real names, and the amount of election expenses paid by the Defendants, which are not relatively large in the accounting report.

Each of the crimes of this case does not seem to have directly influenced the election.

There is no record that Defendants were punished under the Public Official Election Act.

Such circumstances are favorable to the Defendants.

In full view of the above circumstances and other factors of sentencing, including the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendants was made within the reasonable scope of discretion.