Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 800,000.

In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, the Defendants did not pay the fine.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is a candidate and Defendant B's accountant in charge of the defendant's election for a member of the National Assembly of Ansan City, which was held seven times at the same time throughout the country, implemented on June 13, 2018.

From March 19, 2018 to June 13, 2018, Defendants spent 47,110,700 won (amount in excess: 3,110,700 won) in excess of 1/200 (220,000 won), which is the amount of restriction on election expenses for the local council members’ election, publicly announced by the Ansan City Election Commission in connection with the 7th simultaneous local election at the election office of Defendant A located in Ansan-si.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to pay election expenses exceeding 1/200 of the limited amount of election expenses.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. A report on revenue and expenditure of political funds;

1. Report on the appointment of accountant in charge;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as a manual on the preservation of election expenses nationwide at least seven times;

1. Article 258 (1) 1 of the Act on the Election of Public Officials, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of fines concerning facts constituting an offense;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act;

1. The scope of applicable sentences by law: Fines not exceeding 20 million won each; and

2. Scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing criteria: The sentencing criteria are not set.

3. Determination of sentence: The crime of this case committed by the Defendants, as a member of the local council or accountant in charge of the candidate, spent election expenses in excess of 1/200 of the amount limited to election expenses. In light of the purport of the Public Official Election Act, which regulates the excessive election expenses in order to ensure that the election is carried out fairly in accordance with the free will of the people and democratic procedures, and to prevent unlawful election, the Defendants’ nature of the crime is disadvantageous.

However, the excessive election expenses paid by the defendants are 3,110.