logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 거창지원 2015.03.26 2014고합41
공직선거법위반
Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, each of them is 100.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

No one shall make contributions for a candidate during the election period.

Nevertheless, at around 21:00 on May 29, 2014, the Defendants provided approximately 30 election workers of H with food equivalent to KRW 407,00,00 for the sixth G-Gun election at the F cafeteria located in Southern E.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired to make a contribution for H, a candidate for the G/Gun election during the election period.

Summary of Evidence

1. The Defendants’ partial statements in the second trial records;

1. Part of witness I's legal statement and the legal statement of witness J;

1. The first police statement concerning I;

1. Statement of the police statement to K;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to L Preparation statements;

1. Article 257 (1) 1 and Article 115 of the Public Official Election Act and Article 30 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts and the selection of punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Determination as to each of the Defendants and defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, respectively, of the provisional payment order

1. Summary of the Defendants’ assertion

A. Although the summary of Defendant A’s assertion has paid KRW 100,000 to Defendant B at the date and place of criminal facts in the judgment of the Defendant, since 100,000 was completely different from the meal cost for H’s election campaign workers, the Defendant cannot be recognized as an intentional act of donation.

B. Although Defendant B paid meals to H’s election campaign workers at the date and time of criminal facts as indicated in the judgment of the Defendant, it is the fact that the Defendant paid the meal expenses at the place, this is the first election campaign manager in the H election campaign office, and the Defendant was expected to receive a return from I. Therefore, there is no intention to make contributions

2. In light of the evidence duly admitted and examined by this court, the Defendants are forced to work for H candidates and members of the National Assembly since 30 years prior to the 6th G-Gun election (hereinafter “instant election”).

arrow