The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal that the court below sentenced the defendant (six months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unfair.

2. The procedural legitimacy and fairness of the determination are the foundation of representative democracy that is no longer required to be explained, and the Act on Entrusted Elections by Public Organizations, etc. provides that "the purpose of contributing to the sound development of public organizations, etc. and the development of democratic society" is to re-verification. In this case, the defendant's act of conducting election campaigns by providing members with cash and small futures set by taking advantage of the status of the president of the association violates the procedural legitimacy and fairness of the election of the president of the association, and violates the purport of the Act on Entrusted Election by Public Organizations, etc. to ensure the free decision-making of the members. In particular, in the case of D election, the act of giving money and valuables or goods at the election of the president of the association is likely to have a significant impact on the election. Furthermore, the defendant's act of giving money and valuables at the election of the president of the association is likely to seriously undermine the fairness of the election itself, and thereby impairing trust in the business that local agricultural cooperatives ordinarily carry out, thereby impairing the trust of the business that the head of the association has already been punished.

However, it is also recognized that the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes and reflected, that many local residents want to take the Defendant’s wife, and that there is no criminal record exceeding the fine.

In addition, in full view of the following circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the offense, means and consequence, etc., as well as the circumstances after the offense, and there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may change the sentencing of the lower court after the lower judgment.