The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged, despite the fact-finding and misapprehension of the legal doctrine that there was no statement on the facts charged, and even if such statement was made, it constitutes grounds for excluding illegality under Article 310 of the Criminal Act. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or by

B. In light of the circumstances leading up to the Defendant’s instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment (two million won by fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) Determination of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to the assertion of facts, (1) the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence, i.e., (i) the defendant made a statement as stated in the facts charged, according to the statement of H, I, G, and F, (ii) the preparing entity of the investigation report of this case held by the defendant is unclear, and even according to the above investigation report, there is no statement that the victim took unfair benefits equivalent to one billion won through the instant pest business, and even if the victim was involved in embezzlement, etc. against the gift related to the disease that should be attributed to the domestic E organization, the above investigation report does not contain specific circumstances that the victim is responsible for the above embezzlement, etc. except for the situation that the victim operates the instant pest business, and (iii) the defendant is considered to have received the same statement as stated in the facts charged without any specific grounds to prevent the victim from winning the election of the victim on the day before the branch president of the E organization, and (iv) the victim was not subject to punishment for the business or activities of the E organization from 201 to 205.