logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.11.13 2014노2468
공직선거법위반
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for ten months.

, however, from the date when this judgment has become final.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the erroneous determination of facts or misapprehension of legal principles on the violation of prohibition of distributing documents by unlawful means as prescribed in Articles 255(2)5 and 93(1) of the Public Official Election Act, the Defendants’ act did not object to political parties or candidates in order to influence the election, but did not object to the candidate’s misconduct for the public interest. As to the Defendants’ act of aiding and abetting candidates as prescribed in Article 251 of the Public Official Election Act, the Defendants’ act constitutes “when the Defendants’ act constitutes “when it is true and is about public interest” as prescribed in the proviso of Article 251 of the Public Official Election Act and “when it comes to public interest.” [In the grounds of appeal filed by the Defendant’s defense counsel, the Defendants’ act of distributing documents, etc. by unlawful means from December 16, 2013 to March 22, 2014 (the part concerning violation of Article 255(2)5 of the Public Official Election Act among the crimes in the original judgment) and the remainder of the Defendant’s act alleged as to the facts charged in the first instance.

[2] The lower court’s sentence on the Defendants of unreasonable sentencing (Defendant A: one year of suspended sentence, two years of suspended sentence, probation, community service order and confiscation, Defendant B: one year of suspended sentence, two years of suspended sentence, probation and community service order) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendants by the prosecutor is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In order to determine whether the Defendants’ act of distributing the former part of the Defendants’ assertion of mistake or misapprehension of legal principles constitutes an evasion of the law with the aim of influencing an election under Article 93(1) of the Public Official Election Act, the act of distributing documents that meet the constituent elements of Articles 255(2)5 and 93(1) of the Public Official Election Act.

arrow