The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is that the sentence of the lower court (one month of imprisonment with prison labor and two years of suspended sentence) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The instant crime was committed in the course of the Defendant’s election of the C Standing Director: (a) providing food equivalent to KRW 187,500 and cash 10 million to the directors who are able to exercise influence over the members of the C Standing Director Recommendation Committee at the time of election; (b) in light of the timing of providing money; (c) the amount of money provided; (d) the nature of the crime is not good; and (e) the responsibility is heavy; and (e) the purpose of the relevant provision on the Agricultural Cooperative Act to prevent the excessive competition and to ensure the fairness of election is to be strictly punished against the Defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the Defendant is seriously against the instant crime, the Defendant seems to have heard some of C’s directors about the provision of money and valuables, and appears to have caused the instant crime. At the time of the instant case, the board of directors at the meeting of the board of directors, who was a standing director at the time of the instant case, made a statement about the instant crime and received an investigation by itself, the Defendant was an initial offender with no criminal history, and the Defendant appears to have faithfully worked as a standing director C for a long time.

In light of the above circumstances and other circumstances that led to the instant crime, such as the circumstance and motive, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the age of the Defendant, sexual conduct, family relationship, occupation, etc., and the conditions for the sentencing as shown in the arguments and records, the Defendant’s punishment is too unqualified for executive officers of regional agricultural cooperatives in accordance with the relevant provisions according to the original sentence. As such, the lower court’s sentence is too uneasible and unfair, the prosecutor’s improper assertion of sentencing is not acceptable.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is without merit, and thus, Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.