Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

No person shall carry out an election campaign by means of appeal for support, other than filing and distributing election campaign bulletins issued by the Saemaul Treasury, appeal for support at a joint speech meeting held by the Saemaul Treasury (including text messages) and computer communications (including e-mail) in connection with the election of an executive officer of the Saemaul Treasury.

Nevertheless, in relation to the election of executive officers of the Korea Saemaul Bank, which was implemented on January 27, 2017, the Defendant, on the ground that, in around January 18, 2017, "D Saemaul Bank found D' and 1.1 billion won loans are not made from 3.9% to 3.7%, on the ground that he/she was spited, spited, spited, spited, and dived into verbal languages on two occasions.

No one who is a good person and can be elected as a member of the Board of Audit and Inspection of this case.

After making a letter to the purport that “E and the branch,” the spouse of E and F, sent it to 125 representatives, including G, who are the voters of the above Saemaul Depository, at the sub-party post located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seoul, on January 20, 2017, and reached 107 persons among them.

Accordingly, the defendant carried out an election campaign other than the methods prescribed by the Saemaul Cooperatives Act.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the defendant in the first trial record;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on the delivery of letters, copies of letter bags, names of representatives, certificates of receipt of executive candidates' registration certificates, and details of delivery of mail by the defendant's writing;

1. Relevant provisions of the Act and Articles 85 (3) and 22 (3) of the Saemaul Treasury Act, which choose the punishment for an offense;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act does not seem to have disseminated false facts, or it does not seem that there was a purpose of slandering the Defendant, and the degree of violation is possible to transmit text messages and e-mail by means of election campaign.