The part concerning Defendant B and Defendant C in the judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

B and Defendant C shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Each sentence of the lower court against the Defendants in the summary of the grounds for appeal (a fine of KRW 5 million is imposed on Defendant A; a fine of KRW 1 million is imposed on Defendant B; a fine of KRW 1 year is imposed on Defendant C; and a fine of KRW 14 million is imposed on Defendant C) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant’s crime of this case committed by the Defendant A in collusion with the head of the local agricultural cooperative association having influence over the voters in collusion with the Defendant for the head of the O Gun, and the act of making an act of making an act of making a contribution equivalent to the cost of making an election for public office is likely to impair the fairness and transparency of the election and to impede the reasonable choice of the voters, and thus, the Defendant’s liability cannot be deemed to be less than the Defendant’s criminal liability.

However, on the other hand, there are circumstances that should be favorable or taken into account to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant led to the confession of and seriously against the crime of this case, the fact that the entire end of this case was revealed by the defendant's information, the fact that there was no record of punishment for the same kind of crime, and the family environment and economic situation of the defendant who supports the baby as a single-parent family

In addition, comprehensively taking into account the following factors: the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive or circumstance of the offense, means and method of the offense, contents and result of the offense, the conditions of sentencing indicated in the records, such as circumstances after the offense, and the scope of recommended sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee, it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

B. The Defendant’s crime of this case committed by the Defendant B in collusion with the head of the local agricultural cooperative association having influence over the voters in collusion with A for a candidate who intends to be going to the head of theO, and the act of making an act of making an act of making an contribution equivalent to the cost of the pro rata procedure is likely to undermine the fairness and transparency of the election and to interfere with the reasonable choice of the voters.