[1] The meaning of "Intimidation" under Article 237 (1) 1 of the Public Official Election and Prevention of Unlawful Election Act

[2] The meaning of "the freedom of election" under Article 237 (1) 2 of the Act on the Election of Public Officials and the Prevention of Unlawful Election

[3] The case holding that an act of obstructing the elector's freedom of judgment by influencing the elector's judgment on a candidate by a speech or an expression with a strong political opinion does not constitute an act of interfering with the freedom of election under Article 237 (1) 2 of the Act on the Election of Public Officials and the Prevention of Election Malpractice

[1] In order to establish a crime of interference with the freedom of election under Article 237 (1) 1 of the Act on the Election of Public Officials and the Prevention of Election Malpractice by Intimidation, there must be an act of threatening an elector, candidate, or candidate, election campaign manager, chief of the election campaign liaison office, election campaign worker, accountant in charge, election campaign speechmaker, or elected person in connection with the election. In this case, the term "Intimidation" means notifying the other party specifically of harm and injury with the intention

[2] The freedom of choice of a candidate under the Act on the Election of Public Officials and the Prevention of Election Malpractice is directly protected by the crime of publishing false facts under Article 250 of the same Act or the crime of aiding and abetting candidates under Article 251 of the same Act. Article 237 (1) of the same Act is an act of interfering with freedom of election, and violence, intimidation, inducement, illegal arrest and confinement, seizure of goods for election campaign, act of interference with assembly, speech or traffic under subparagraph 2, act of compelling a person under his protection, direction and supervision to support, recommend, or oppose a specific political party or candidate under subparagraph 3, and it is a certain act or an act of directly interfering with the act of election campaign and voting itself. "Freedom of election" under Article 237 (1) 2 of the same Act refers only to freedom of election campaign and freedom of voting, and it is not included in the freedom of judgment of candidates, and it means that an act of interference with or interference with the freedom of election by means of deceptive means or other unlawful means under Article 237 (1) 2 of the same Act is merely an act of interference with or interference with voting.

[3] The case holding that a speech, etc. with a strong expression of political opinion does not constitute an act of interference with freedom of election as provided by Article 237 (1) 2 of the Act on the Election of Public Officials and the Prevention of Unlawful Election, on the ground that an act concerning election campaign and voting does not constitute a direct interference with the elector's decision, even though it was interfered with the elector's decision, and it is merely an abstract risk that interferes with the freedom of election and voting, and it cannot be seen as an act of interference with freedom of election.

[1] Article 237 (1) 1 and / [2] Article 237 (1) 2 and / [3] Article 237 (1) 2 of the Act on the Election of Public Officials and the Prevention of Unlawful Election / [3] Article 237 (1) 2 of the Act on the Election of Public Officials and the Prevention of Unlawful Election

Han Man-Baail

Park Tae-tae et al.

Cheongyang Law Firm, Attorney Lee Jae-hoon

Seoul District Prosecutors' Office Order 98 type 58706 dated November 13, 1998

All of the petition for adjudication of this case is dismissed.

1. Basic facts

According to the records, the following facts are recognized.

A. On June 2, 1998, the applicant (agent) accused the suspect against the violation of the Act on the Election of Public Officials and the Prevention of Election Unlawful Acts (hereinafter “Election Act”). The summary of the suspect in this case that the applicant files an accusation is as follows.

In other words, the suspect's attitude is the president of the Free Democratic Union, and the suspect's tax sentence is the acting president of the New Political Council;

(1) There is no fact that the Defendant was involved in the claim of a National Assembly member of the Republic of Korea Kim Mara who belongs to the Republic of Korea Kim Mara, and the case of a non-financing;

At around 14:00 on May 31, 1998, the President of the National Assembly, who is the person in charge of the start-up of the group Kimcheon-si, opened at the 6.4 east-si, Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si square, attended a political party campaign speech meeting of the candidate Lee Jong-young recommended by the President of the Do governor on the recommendation of the Democratic Republic of Korea National Assembly of the 6.4 Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do - to investigate where the president of the request construction (f.g., omission) went into the country. There are 6,7 persons near this well known. At the same time, there are 14:0 Do Do 13 billion won in office, and Do Do 1998, the president of the National Assembly member, who is the person in charge of the start-up of the group, would have gone into the country. It will appear well near this Do Do son by openly making a speech by disclosing and 6 of the case by disclosing.

(2) The suspect’s tax sentence shall:

(A) On June 1, 1998, atHanam City, a multilateral conference and "after the completion of the 6.4 local election, the regular reorganization is inevitable, and two number of Korean National Assembly members are required to break away from her will. Korea National Assembly members are reported to the effect that a large number of National Assembly members are likely to break away from her will." After the 6.4 local election, "Korea National Assembly members were reported to the effect that the division of Korea National Assembly members is promoted through artificial reorganization after the 6.4 local election, thereby hindering the freedom of election by unlawful means regarding the above election, such as interfering with the freedom of election by psychologically reducing the candidates belonging to Korea National Assembly members of Korea National Assembly, National Assembly members belonging to Korea National Assembly, and those engaged in election affairs, including National Assembly members belonging to Korea National Assembly members, who go through 6.4

(B) On June 1, 1998, at the new political party campaign speech meeting of the Chuncheon City, which was held in Chuncheon City on June 1, 1998, and "Korea National Assembly member was erroneous in political and economic activities during the past period of house ownership. The use place of 2 trillion won out of 6 trillion won of Korea's loan is unclear. This part shall be known to the early, and it shall not be deemed that the private sector does not intervene in the process of authorization and permission of Korea National Assembly member." After making a speech, it damages the reputation of Korea National Assembly member by openly pointing out false facts both that Korea National Assembly member was illegally involved in the process of authorization of Korea National Assembly member and Korea National Assembly member, etc., and by suggesting that the internal intention of the situation authorities is in progress, it shall not interfere with the election affairs of Korea National Assembly member, including the candidate for Korea National Assembly member, National Assembly member belonging to Korea National Assembly member, etc., and shall not actively interfere with the election affairs of Korea National Assembly member by actively interfering with the election campaign.

B. On November 13, 1998, the prosecutor of the Seoul District Prosecutors' Office investigated the suspect about the following facts, and found that the prosecutor of the Seoul District Prosecutors' Office was not guilty of all the charges, and the applicant filed an application for this case on November 24, 1998.

2. Summary of grounds for application for adjudication;

The applicant asserts that the above remarks by the suspect Park Jong-tae is unfair disposition of this case by the prosecutor's non-prosecution decision-making that there is no suspicion of a crime despite Article 237 (1) 1 and 2 of the Election Act is unreasonable (the part concerning the crime of defamation in this case is excluded from the applicant's application for adjudication) since it is clear that the applicant may interfere with free election campaign by threatening candidates and persons engaged in election affairs by using means such as reorganization and internal investigation by the authorities of the situation, rather than expressing his own thoughts and political views in the future (the part concerning the crime of defamation in this case is not subject to the application for adjudication).

3. Determination

A. As to the assertion of violation of Article 237(1)1 of the Election Act

(1) In order to establish a crime of interference with the freedom of election under Article 237(1)1 of the Election Act by intimidation, there must be an act of threatening an elector, candidate, or candidate "in relation to the election", an election campaign manager, chief of the election campaign liaison office, election campaign worker, chief of the election campaign liaison office, election campaign worker, accountant in charge, election campaign speechmaker, or elected person". In this case, the term "Intimidation" means a notice of harm and injury

(2) First of all, there is no evidence to deem that a member of Kim Ma-hwan constituted a "election, election campaign worker, election campaign speechmaker, etc." under Article 237 (1) 1 of the Election Act, i.e., the fact that he/she was suspected of committing the suspect's gambling, i.e., the above 1. (a).

(3) Next, considering the facts of the criminal suspect's tax punishment, i.e. 1. A., the fact that the suspect was subject to examination, i.e., intimidation on the candidate and the person engaged in the election affairs, with only the details of the press opinions or the contents of the speech, cannot be deemed to constitute intimidation on the candidate and the person engaged in the election affairs, and there is no other evidence that the suspect's tax punishment

(4) If so, all suspects are not suspected of having violated the Election Act due to intimidation. Thus, the prosecutor's disposition of non-prosecution regarding this issue is just, and the applicant's application for adjudication is without merit.

B. As to the assertion of violation of Article 237(1)2 of the Election Act

(1) The suspects are suffering from the following as to the suspected facts.

(A) Suspect Park Jong-chul at the above political party speech meeting: (a) was true that the suspect made a speech to the effect that "the (defluence omitted) president and other council members raised enormous funds as known through the media as well; (b) considerable part of this money was carried out as political funds; and (c) when considering the place of origin of the parties, there are 6,7 f, and there are 7 f, or more members of the Yong-Namn Party; and (d) us has a neighbor Kim Jong-chul." There was no fact that she made a statement as if he were involved in the case of non-funds, by referring to a specific political person, including Kim Ma-ri, including Kim Jong-ri, and there was no fact that she made a statement as if he were involved in the case of non-funds; and (d) thorough investigation and serious measures on the commencement of the claim raised continuously through the media at the time; and (e) there was no intention to interfere with the freedom of election of Kim Jong-man.

(B) Suspect tax sentence: The statement made to the effect that it is identical to the fact that it was avoided at the speech meeting of the political party or political party; however, it is true that the president acting as the president of the political party would have avoided the prospect of the future political party in the future after the election of the 6.4 local government, and criticizes the economic situation of the Hanna City, which was a party with the power in the past, to a high level of high level, and there was no intention to interfere with the freedom of election of the Hanna Party.

(2) The freedom of choice of a candidate under the Election Act is directly protected by the crime of publishing false facts under Article 250 of the Election Act or the crime of aiding and abetting candidates under Article 251 of the Election Act, and the act of interfering with freedom of election under Article 237(1) of the Election Act, such as assault, intimidation, inducement, illegal arrest and confinement, seizure of goods for election campaign, act of interference with assembly, speech or traffic under Article 237(2)2 of the Election Act, and act of compelling a person under his protection, direction and supervision to support, recommend or oppose a specific political party or candidate under Article 233 of the Election Act, and these acts are acts of directly interfering with election campaign and voting themselves, and the term "right of election" under Article 237(1)2 of the Election Act refers only to freedom of election campaign and freedom of voting, and it does not include the freedom of judgment of candidates, and it does not include any acts that interfere with or interfere with election campaign speech or abstract freedom of election.

(3) First, according to the records on the suspect's gambling, the above political party's speech meeting is not sufficient to establish evidence to recognize that the suspect's gambling did not take place in the above political party's speech meeting as known through this media, and it is probable that the president and the non-party member raised a huge amount of secret funds, and considerable portion of these money could have taken place as political funds, and at the point of origin of the parties, there may be relevant persons among the members of the Yong-Nam area. Since the prosecution is conducting investigation, it will be clear that the investigation will be completed. Since the prosecutor is currently conducting investigation, it will be clear that the investigation will be completed." Furthermore, even though it is deemed that there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge that the suspect's gambling did not directly go through his request and made a speech in the non-funds case, and even if it made a speech so that such misunderstanding or presumption could be made, in light of the overall context, the above speech does not directly affect the elector's decision on the election campaign fund and the elector's right to vote, as it does not directly affect the voting's decision.

(4) Next, according to the health records on the suspect's tax type, the suspect's statement or speech is acknowledged as having been made at the speech meeting of a political party or campaign speech meeting with the same contents as the accused. In light of the overall purport, the contents of the speech meeting or the contents of the speech meeting at the speech meeting at the speech meeting at the speech meeting at the speech meeting at the speech meeting at the political party is not only a direct interference with the elector's decision, but also a specific act of interfering with the election campaign and voting itself, but also a specific act of interfering with the freedom of election under Article 27 (1) 27 of the Election Act, since it is not a specific act of interfering with the freedom of election under Article 27 (1) 27 of the Election Act, it is not a specific act of interfering with the freedom of election under Article 27 (1) 27 of the Election Act, because it is against the abstract risk of interference with the freedom of election.

(5) If so, there is no suspicion of violation of Article 237 (1) 2 of the Election Act. Thus, the prosecutor's disposition of non-prosecution regarding this issue is just, and the applicant's application for adjudication is without merit.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the applicant’s application for adjudication of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 273(2) of the Election Act and Article 262(1)1 of the Criminal Procedure Act, since all of the application for adjudication of this case is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Tae-hwan (Presiding Judge)