1. The part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A (including the part not guilty of the grounds) shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of 2.5 million.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The supplemental statement of reasons for appeal filed after the lapse of the period for filing the appeal by Defendant A is considered to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental statement of reasons for appeal.

1) The money and valuables received from Defendant A related to the election campaign is borrowed for the purpose of using it for daily expenses, not money and valuables provided in relation to the election campaign.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby receiving money and valuables from N in connection with the election campaign.

In other words, the court has determined the person.

B) Election expenses in excess of election expenses are election expenses in excess of KRW 79,560 for an election campaign office of March 15, 2016 and KRW 92,800 for an election campaign office of March 23, 2016 and for an election campaign office of March 23, 2016, and KRW 8,400,000, out of KRW 24,000,000, for interview and debate vehicles at the place of public speech on April 21, 2016, since election expenses are expenses incurred in conducting personnel affairs after the election is completed, they should be excluded from election expenses.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby exceeding 1/200 of the total amount restricted to election expenses and the amount restricted to election expenses publicly announced by M election campaign office, including the above expenses.

In other words, the court has determined the person.

2) Although Defendant A was found to have spent KRW 31,184,385 with the cost of transmitting text messages related to election campaign, the fact that Defendant A conspired with theO is not true about the violation of each political fund law.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misunderstanding the facts, thereby recognizing the conspiracys between Defendant A and theO.

B) Defendant A, without knowledge of the details of the false entries in election expenses disbursement evidence, has to pay to R based on the documents left by theO after theO was detained, a statement of guidance on the preservation of election expenses, etc.