All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The scope of the court's trial and the part of the facts charged in this case against co-defendants in the court below among the facts charged in this case became final and conclusive through the court below, appellate court, and the court's trial is limited to the part against the defendant, and the proceedings against the defendant

The court below found the Defendant not guilty on the violation of the Public Official Election Act due to the act of contribution to salt gift to the reporters, among the facts charged against the Defendant, and judged the Defendant guilty on the violation of the Public Official Election Act due to the provision of money and goods for the illegal use of broadcasting, newspapers, etc. which are in a mutually competitive relationship, and sentenced the Defendant to 10 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended sentence.

The Defendant appealed from the judgment of the court below on the grounds of erroneous determination of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as to the guilty portion against the Defendant, and the prosecutor appealed on the guilty portion against the Defendant on the grounds of unfair sentencing on the grounds of misapprehension of legal principles as to the acquittal portion against the Defendant. The judgment prior to the remanded was accepted by the prosecutor’s claim and convicted the Defendant of violation of the Public Official Election Act due to the act of donation of gift gift set to the reporters, and reversed the remaining facts charged by the Defendant and sentenced the Defendant

The Defendant appealed on the grounds of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles with respect to the judgment of the court prior to remand. The appellate court rejected most of the Defendant’s grounds of appeal, while citing the Defendant’s grounds of appeal on the violation of the Public Official Election Act due to the act of contribution to salt gift set to the reporters, there was an error of misapprehending the legal principles on the Public Official Election Act. The Defendant’s assertion in the grounds of appeal was reversed, and remanded to this court all remaining convictions in relation to commercial competition or concurrent

2.