A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

No person shall interfere with the preparation, posting, posting or installation of posters, placards or other propaganda facilities under the Election of Public Officials Act, or damage or remove them without justifiable grounds.

Nevertheless, on June 1, 2018, at around 10:15, the Defendant damaged the 7th anniversary of the election posters of candidates F and G, etc. for simultaneous local elections, which are installed at the “E” fence at the time D at the time when the Defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to stimulative disorder, by means of greging the stone with a stone with a string, tearing, etc. without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. On-site photographs and photographs by cutting a black stuff;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on internal investigation reports (the list of posters damaged candidates);

1. Article 240 (1) of the Act on the Election of Public Officials and the Selection of fines concerning facts constituting an offense, Article 240 of the Act on the Election of Public Officials;

1. Article 10 (2) and Article 55 (1) 6 of the Criminal Act to mitigate mental and physical weakness;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act;

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Fines of 50,000 to two million won;

2. Application of the sentencing criteria: The sentencing criteria are not set;

3. Determination of sentence: The crime of this case requires a fine of KRW 500,000,000, inasmuch as the Defendant, without any justifiable reason, destroyed the poster under the Public Official Election Act by means of tearing with a stone with a stone, thereby infringing upon the right of a person with a right to know and interfering with a fair election campaign, the liability for the crime of this case is not less complicated.

However, under the favorable circumstances, the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes and reflects his mistake, committed the instant crime with extreme mental and physical weakness due to a stimulative disorder, and did not seem to have any intention or purpose to slander a specific candidate or to interfere with an election, and the fact that there was no past record of punishment for the same kind of crime is considered.