Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 1,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 500,000.

The above fine is imposed against the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

Except as provided for in the Public Official Election Act, no one shall distribute, spread, post, or affix any newspaper, communication, magazine, or organ or other publication of any institution, organization, or facility, which carries an article related to an election, in a way other than ordinary ways, or reproduce such article to distribute, spread, post, or affix it.

Nevertheless, the Defendants were able to distribute to many people the newspapers on which articles about D were candidates for the 20th National Assembly C National Assembly members, and around 01:00 on April 4, 2016, Defendant A cited “H” 30 on the newspaper board at the entrance of “F Hot Spring” located in E, and distributed the above H 30 on the commercial building located in the same Gu as Defendant B at around 17:00 on the same day.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Corning photographs and photographs;

1. H (No. 4, 2016);

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the internal investigation report (H on April 4, 2016, attaching a copy of the article related to candidates D; the process, place, etc. for which A distributes H); and the application of the investigative report (i.e., collected H attachment);

1. Relevant Articles and 252(3) and 95(1) of the Public Official Election Act and Article 30 of the Criminal Act ( comprehensively and collectively, choice of fines) apply to the Defendants on criminal facts and the choice of punishment;

1. Defendants to be detained in a workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: The fact that the crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which infringes the fairness of the election and affects the rational decision-making of the voters, is highly likely to interfere with the development of democracy in our society, is disadvantageous to the Defendants, but the Defendants’ act seems not to have a significant impact on the election result; the Defendants recognized their mistake; and the fact that the Defendants did not have any previous error is favorable to the Defendants.

In addition, the defendants' age, character and behavior, family environment, and family environment.