The judgment below

The part against the Defendants is reversed.

Defendants are not guilty.

1. On January 14, 2015, the Defendants were indicted as the charges indicated in the separate sheet for the prosecution of Gwangju District Court Decision 201Da766, and the said court sentenced the Defendants to respective fines.

As to this, the Defendants filed an appeal with the Gwangju District Court 2015No255, and the above court reversed the judgment of the court below on December 24, 2015, and imposed a fine of KRW 900,000 on Defendant A and F, Defendant B, C, E, G, and H, and the above judgment became final and conclusive.

On the other hand, the defendants' defense counsel filed a request for the reexamination of this case, and this court decided to commence the reexamination on January 11, 2018, and the above decision became final and conclusive as it is.

2. Each sentence of the lower court against the Defendants in summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

3. Ex officio determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is as shown in the annexed sheet.

B. B. Before the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the Defendants, we examine the part of the judgment ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the Defendants, and the Constitutional Court: (a) in the case of 2015Hun-Ba 62 on November 24, 2016, the portion of Article 50(4) of the former Agricultural Cooperative Act (amended by Act No. 11690, Mar. 23, 2013; and (b) which provides that “the election campaign under subparagraph 4 shall not be carried out from “election of directors” in Article 50(4) of the former Agricultural Cooperative Act (amended by Act No. 12755, Jun. 11, 2014); and (c) the portion of the election campaign under Article 172(2)2 of the former Agricultural Cooperative Act (amended by Act No. 10522, Mar. 31, 2014) shall be punished by all those who violate the Constitution.

Article 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act provides that “The legal provision applicable to the facts charged in this case, thereby retroactively loses its effect pursuant to Article 47(3) of the Act, and thus, the part of the judgment below against the Defendants in the judgment below cannot be maintained.

4. Accordingly, the part of the judgment of the court below against the Defendants is reversed under the above authority.