logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 동부지원 2016.08.23 2016고합84
공직선거법위반
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 1,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The Defendants respectively.

Reasons

. In the event of the establishment of an election office, a contribution was made on behalf of the member of the JA who wishes to be a candidate for the 20th election of National Assembly members by providing food equivalent to KRW 128,000,00,00, such as original white houses and duckss, such as 1,280,000 in the attached list of crimes (1).

2. When the Defendant who interfered with Defendant B’s business came to know of the fact that he/she conducted a telephone public opinion poll in a mutual public opinion poll company, “N (representative)” from January 14, 2016 to January 21:50, 2016, to identify the support rate, etc. of the preliminary candidates for the 20th National Assembly members, the Defendant came to know of the fact that he/she conducted a telephone public opinion poll in order to identify the support rate, etc. of the preliminary candidates for the 20th National Assembly members from January 15, 2016 to 11:55 on the same day, the Defendant is now going to conduct the public opinion poll.

P~ Q telephone is a duplicing request for public relations to actively change to public opinion poll.

Current R District J, S, T public opinion polls

B. The response rate of 40 to 50 large 20 large 20 large 20 large 20 large 20 large 20 large 20 large 20 persons is low. The answer rate of 20 large 1 persons = 40 large 5 to 6 persons, including the transmission of text messages to the above 10 persons, and the transmission of text messages to the effect that the above 10 persons, including the transmission of text messages to the above A, etc., would be able to respond to the public opinion poll, as shown in the attached list of crimes. The above victim interfered with the public opinion poll business conducted by deceptive means.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant A's partial statement

1. Defendant B’s legal statement

1. Each police statement made to U, V, W, X,Y, Z, AA, and AB;

1. Each letter of answer to X-W;

1. Inquiries into details of each currency;

1. Copies of a report to conduct public opinion poll;

1. Letters messages recovered from B mobile phones;

1. Photographs, such as L cafeterias;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (A2 times to investigate persons who attend a meeting and investigate persons who attend a meeting), investigation reports (written statements by recipients of text and file written statements);

1. Relevant Article of the Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;

(a) Defendant A: Article 257(1)1 and Article 115 of the Election of Public Officials Act;

B. Defendant B: Articles 314(1) and 313 of the Criminal Act (Punishment.

arrow