logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.05.03 2018노17
공직선거법위반
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. The grounds for appeal are summarized as follows: (a) permission to amend a bill of indictment was granted in the first instance trial as follows; and (b) the reasons for appeal also changed.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant was found not guilty on the ground that the defendant was not guilty, on the ground that he did not have any awareness of false facts or nor any intention that E candidates would not be elected, by posting a false statement in relation to the 19th presidential candidate election of the 19th presidential candidate (hereinafter referred to as the "the 19th presidential candidate election" in this case) on his page account. The court below found that the defendant was not guilty on the ground that he did not have any intention to make the 19th presidential candidate election of the 19th presidential candidate election.

2. In the facts charged at the trial, the prosecutor of the ex officio judgment applied for changes in the indictment to the effect that “the Defendant published false facts with the intention of preventing the Defendant from being elected,” among the following facts: “The Defendant, with respect to the instant competition, published false facts with the intention of preventing the Defendant from being elected, with the intention of preventing the Defendant from being elected.” Since this Court permitted this, the lower court’s judgment against the Defendant was no longer maintained.

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the prosecutor's misunderstanding of the facts and misunderstanding of the legal principles still are subject to the judgment of this court.

3. Determination as to the prosecutor’s mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, around March 18, 2017, using smartphones at the hotel C in order to use smartphones, and that fact was that the order of the instant light-line E and 2 F, even though the order of the instant light-line E and 2 was around 1, 201, “1 F, 2 G, 3 E, 4, H, 5 I, 6, 7, K, 8, 8, 9 MD political parties.

arrow