The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the violation of the Act on the Election of Public Officials under Article 2 of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below, there is no fact that the defendant made R to prepare the news of this case or to publish it in the Facebook.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby finding the Defendant guilty.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendant (two years of suspended sentence in six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court rejected the above assertion by providing a detailed statement on the Defendant’s assertion and judgment following the “a summary of evidence” of the judgment.

In full view of the following circumstances found by evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below and the court below in light of the circumstances revealed by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable.

Some of the statements by the witness E and W do not interfere with the acknowledgement of the facts constituting the crime in this part, and there is no other evidence to reverse them.

Therefore, Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts cannot be accepted.

1) The overall purport of the statement from R’s investigative agency to the court below was “to produce the instant card news according to the direction of the Defendant.”

The instant card news was produced in a way that the Defendant received the phrase on his face, and the images were reconstructed based on the above phrase.

The produced news was shown to the Defendant, and the Defendant heard the horses from the Defendant, and then delivered the card news to W, and posted it in the Facebook.

“.” The contents of the R’s statement concerning the circumstances during which the Defendant received an order from the Defendant to produce a card are relatively consistent with the very specific and key parts, and is contrary thereto.