The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the statement by eachJ contained in the copy of the recording of the conversation made by the misunderstanding of the facts of the Defendant or the misunderstanding of the legal principles and the recording of the recording of the conversation made by the J was not proved as “in particular reliable circumstances,” as prescribed by the proviso of Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and thus, it is not admissible, and even if the admissibility of family evidence is recognized, its credibility cannot be acknowledged.

J Each statement of S, T, X, AB, W, etc. concerning the fact that the Defendant visited the Defendant’s O election campaign office between M 16:00 and 17:00, and that the J issued the Defendant a shopping bag containing KRW 30 million to the Defendant at a very high place in which the Defendant Defendant M, as well as each statement of J, S, T, R, R, U, and V, etc., are contrary to the rule of experience, and cannot be trusted as they are without credibility.

Even if the credibility of the evidence presented by the family prosecutor's office is recognized, it can only be recognized that S brings about a shopping bag inferred that S had paid money to the Defendant and the Do governor, and further, it is not recognized that S issued a shopping bag containing money to the Defendant and the Defendant was issued with the recognition that the Defendant was in the shopping bag, or that the money contained in the shopping bag is KRW 30 million.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of the execution of two years, the additional collection of thirty million won) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

Judgment

In order to realize the principle of due process provided by Article 12(1) of the Constitution and the right to fair trial guaranteed by Article 27 of the Constitution, the Criminal Litigation Act of the J's recording of the contents of conversation and its recording, and the Criminal Litigation Act of the copies of the J's recording of the recording of the recording of the recording of the recording is based on the principle of direct deliberation at the center of the trial in order to realize the right to a fair trial.

Therefore, it is true.