The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal can be acknowledged that the defendant requested K to provide support in relation to the election of the president of an agricultural cooperative (hereinafter “instant election”) on March 7, 2015, and delivered KRW 200,000 to K. However, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on determining otherwise and finding the defendant not guilty.

2. Determination

A. In light of the fact that the appellate court of criminal trial has the nature of ex post facto trial and the spirit of substantial direct trial as provided in the Criminal Procedure Act, the appellate court may recognize the credibility of the witness’s statement even though the appellate court, which directly observed the witness’s appearance and attitude in the process of witness examination for the witness who supported the facts charged, cannot recognize the credibility of the witness’s statement, despite the fact that the appellate court, who directly observed the witness’s appearance and attitude in the process of witness examination, cannot recognize the credibility of the witness’s statement.

In order to consider the credibility of the statement as evidence of conviction, the first deliberation judgment rejecting the credibility of the statement should be deemed to have been able to be acceptable and sufficient and reasonable (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do11428 Decided February 18, 2016). (B) The evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court and the first instance court is acknowledged as follows.

① At the time of confirming the amount of money received K, K shall complete the work at low time and shall collect money from Australia in the court of the original instance.

The amount was confirmed.

Although the statement was made ", the court confirmed the amount after the lapse of one hour in return for money."

“The statement was reversed.”

② K initially met the Defendant on February 2015 in the course of investigation, and considered the Defendant on the day of the instant case as the second in the course of investigation.

“The Defendant was first present on the day of the instant case in the court of the first instance.”

“The statement was reversed.”

In addition, the above statements are written statements submitted by K in the course of investigation.