Whether the act of offering money or goods prior to the preparation of the electoral registry constitutes a violation of Article 156 subparag. 1 of the former Election Act (Article 149 subparag. 1 of the current Election Act)

An elector under Article 156 subparagraph 1 of the former Election Act refers to a person who has a voting right and is registered on the electoral register pursuant to Articles 5 and 19 of the same Act. Thus, offering money and valuables for the purpose of getting elected or not to be elected at the time when the electoral register was not prepared does not constitute a violation of Article 156 subparagraph 1 of the same Article.

Article 5 of the former Election Act (Act No. 3093), Article 19 of the former Election of National Assembly Members Act, Article 156 subparagraph 1 of the former Election of National Assembly Members Act

Defendant 1 and one other

Defendants

Seoul Criminal District Court (79Gohap8)

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of punishment against the Defendants shall be suspended separately.

The summary of the grounds for appeal by the Defendants is as follows: First, although the Defendants obtained comprehensive consent from Nonindicted 1, 2, 3, and 4, etc., a director of the Social Welfare Association, to use the seals, the Defendants used them, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the facts by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment; second, the Defendants did not pay back the above amount of money to the above Defendants for the first time after and after the passage of the time, and did not pay attention to the fact that they did not use the seals; second, even if they did not engage in an election campaign, the lower court did not arbitrarily err by misapprehending the facts that they were in violation of the National Assembly Act by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations; third, even if Defendant 1 did not use the seals, the lower court’s decision did not err by misapprehending the above facts under the premise that they were in violation of the Public Funds Act; third, the lower court did not withdraw the above amount of money under the premise that they were in breach of trust.

Therefore, the first point of the appeal is examined with the records of legitimate evidence prepared in order to acknowledge the forgery and uttering of private documents by the court below as to the defendants. The defendants' term of office expires as of February 18, 1978 by the head of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office around March 1978. Thus, the defendants are ordered to supplement 1 director under Article 9 of the Social Welfare Act, and only 1 copy of the reasons for the appointment of provisional director was forged using seals such as non-indicted 1, 2, 3, 4 of the above welfare council director in a foreign country while living abroad, and only 1 of the above welfare council director's name was found to be forged by using seals such as non-indicted 1, 2, 3, and 5 of the above welfare council director's appointment. The above judgment of the court below is just and there is no error in incomplete deliberation or misunderstanding of facts. Second, according to legitimate evidence adopted by the court below, the defendants 100 won and 2 of the election campaign were stated in the election campaign at the first time after the election campaign.

In addition, according to the evidence of the court below's theory on the third point of the reasons for appeal, it is sufficient to recognize the fact that Defendant 1 decided to leave the 10th National Assembly members and withdrawn part of the public funds of the above welfare council as stated in 2-A and 2-B at the time of the original adjudication for the purpose of temporary use of the election fund and caused damage to the above welfare council. There is no error of incomplete deliberation or erroneous determination of facts, such as the theory of lawsuit, and there is no ground for appeal.

However, in accordance with the reasoning of the judgment on the fourth ground for appeal above, the court below acknowledged that Defendant 1, as stated in Section 2-A at the time of the original judgment, withdrawn KRW 6,375,650 from November 8, 1978 to November 21, 1978, as well as KRW 6,375,650, as stated in Section 2-B at the time of the original judgment, and caused damages equivalent to the above amount to the welfare council. In addition, on November 23, 1978, Defendant 5, as stated in Section 2-B at the time of the original judgment, withdrawn KRW 10,00,000 deposited in the name of Jeju Branch of the above welfare council, and thereby, Defendant 1 was subject to substantive concurrent crimes of occupational breach of trust.

However, according to the records, it is reasonable to view that the above defendant's withdrawal of the above welfare conference fund at the time and time stated in 2-A and (b) at the time of the original adjudication was made for both the 10th National Assembly members and the purpose of the prior election was to use it for the 10th National Assembly members, and therefore, the criminal intent is a single crime, and the period is short, and the victim is also the same, and the so-called "the above-called crime of occupational breach of trust" is a single crime of occupational breach of trust. Nevertheless, the court below's disposition which deemed the above as a substantive concurrent crime is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles as to the number of crimes of occupational breach of trust, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and thus, it cannot be reversed.

In addition, the court below acknowledged the fact that Defendant 1, like Defendant 2-C at the time of original adjudication, would go to the 10th National Assembly election because Defendant 1 asked Non-Party 6 and Non-Party 3 to go to the 10th National Assembly election as of September 17, 1978, and thus, he would go to the 10,010,000 won for election expenses under the responsibility of Non-Party 6, which would be used for the 10,248,000 won for the election expenses on October 13 of the same year, and 8,248,000 won for the 17th of the same month, and 4,00,000 won for the 10,000,000 won for the 10,000 won for the same month, 32,258,000 won for the 15th of the election campaign, and that Defendant provided money to the National Assembly member for the purpose of election.

However, Article 156 Subparag. 1 of the former Election Act aims to punish the act of inducing the purchase or understanding of voters by providing them with money and valuables to voters, etc. for the purpose of getting them elected or not elected, and according to Article 5 of the same Act, the elector in this Act means a person who has the voting right and is registered on the electoral register.

Therefore, the crime of violation of Article 156 subparagraph 1 of the above Act is established only when a person with the right to vote and who is registered on the electoral register provides money or goods for the purpose of getting the person to be elected or not to be elected. According to Article 19 of the above Act, the electoral register shall be prepared within five days from the date of public announcement of the election day, and according to Article 19 of the above Act, the date of public announcement of the election for the 10th National Assembly member shall be November 24, 1978 and the date of preparation of the electoral register in Jeju-do shall be from November 29 to November 29 of the same year, 1978, which is the date of the original adjudication, until November 13, 1978, until November 21 of the same year, 1978, and even if Defendant 1 provided money for the purpose of election for the National Assembly member, it shall not affect the conclusion of the judgment in violation of Article 15 subparagraph 16 of the former Election Act.

In addition, according to the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court recognized that Defendant 2 offered KRW 300,00 as election expenses by Defendant 1 to Nonindicted 7 at around 18:00 on the date of October 1978, as indicated in the judgment by Defendant 5-A, and recognized that Defendant 1 offered money and valuables for election expenses at around 18:00,000, as stated in the judgment by Defendant 2. However, as seen above, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine of the former Election Act, and thus, cannot avoid reversal.

However, since the Defendants’ above-mentioned crimes of occupational breach of trust and the violation of the Election of National Assembly Members Act are concurrently related to the remaining facts in the judgment and the remaining grounds for appeal, the lower judgment against the Defendants pursuant to Article 364(2) and (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act shall be reversed, and the remaining grounds for appeal shall be determined again as follows.

Defendant 1 was a person who was in the position of the president of a social welfare foundation and was going to the 10th National Assembly member Jeju District, and Defendant 2 was in the position of the head of the above welfare organization;

1. At around 14:00 on March 24, 1978, Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 conspired to prepare as others a statement of reasons for the temporary appointment of directors Nonindicted 1, 2, 3, and 4 in relation to the need to appoint Defendant 1 as temporary directors of the above welfare association for the purpose of events at the office of the welfare foundation located in Mapo-gu Seoul, Mapo-gu, Seoul, 382-14, for the purpose of uttering at the office of the welfare foundation located in Mapo-gu, 382-14, and they shall submit to the Mapo-gu Office a statement of reasons for temporary appointment of directors at the end of the above reason to the end of the above reason, write the name of directors of Nonindicted 1, 3, and 4, and affix each seal of the Dong, etc. who was kept in custody after each name and rear, to write it out, and shall use it as if it was duly formed at around 10:00 on March 25, 205;

2. Defendant 1:

(A) On October 23, 1978, KRW 10,00,00 owned by the Defendant on November 10, 1978, KRW 8,248,000 for welfare association funds, KRW 4,00,00 for welfare association funds on November 17, 197, deposited at the Jeju branch office in the Jeju branch office of the Jeju branch office in Seoul and deposited KRW 22,258,00 for the purpose of personal use. Notwithstanding the above 10,010,00 for the purpose of temporary use of the election funds, the Defendant may withdraw KRW 10,00 for the above 10,000 for the above 10,000,000 for the above 10,000,000 won for the election expenses to be collected from 10,500,000 won for the above 10,000,000 won for the above 10,000 won for the purpose of personal use from 10,5, and 165,05,05.

(B) Around 15:00 on September 17, 199, at the Jeju Branch Office of the Welfare Association around 15:00, the Defendant sent to Nonindicted 6 and 3 others for the 10th National Assembly election by requesting for an election campaign.

(C) During the 10th of October of the same year, the first election campaign is carried out by visiting Nonindicted Party 9’s house located in the 503 North Jeju-gun, Dong-ri, Dong-ri, 503, to that person, who was well asked to participate in the 10th National Assembly election; and

3. Defendant 2:

(A) At the end of October 1978, around 18:00, at the 18:00 date, Defendant 1 went out to the Republic of Korea from the Jeju branch of the Welfare Association's Jeju branch office to Nonindicted 7 (one-day colon) who was the ear Middle School'sssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss

(B) On November 15, 200, Defendant 1 provided approximately KRW 1,110,00 in the aggregate market price to approximately KRW 10,00,00 in the same manner to the 15th day of the same month, including the provision of food equivalent to KRW 10,00 in the market price of fruit, drinking water, etc. to 10,00,000, at the 10,000,000, to the 10,000,000, not later than the 10th day of the same month.

Since the evidence relationship of the above facts is the same as the time of the judgment of the court below, it is accepted by Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Of the judgment below, one of the above Articles 231 and 30 of the Criminal Act was divided into one of the above Articles, and one of the above Articles 1 and 234, 231, and 30-2 of the Criminal Act's holding that the above Articles 356, and 355 (2) of the Criminal Act's holding that the above Articles 35-1 and 3-2 of the Criminal Act's holding that the above Articles were committed for a long period of time, and one of the above Articles 181 (1) 1 and 38 of the Criminal Act's holding that the above Articles 18 of the Criminal Act's provision of the above Articles 18-1 and 30 of the Criminal Act's provision of the above Articles 18-2 and 5 of the Criminal Act's provision of the above Articles' 7 of the Criminal Act's provision of the above Articles' 18-1 and 7 of the Criminal Act's provision of the above Articles's imprisonment with prison labor.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, Defendant 1 offered money for the purpose of winning a National Assembly member by remitting the total of KRW 32,258,000 to four times from October 23 to November 21 of the same year, and Defendant 2 offered money for the purpose of winning a National Assembly member by requesting Defendant 1 to support for the future National Assembly member at around 18:00 on the date of the end of October 1978, and the provision of KRW 300,000 with the election expenses is not a crime for the same reason as seen in the grounds for reversal, and thus, the acquittal should be pronounced, or each of the above facts against the Defendants should be pronounced since it does not overlap with the facts in advance under the judgment that found Defendant 2 guilty with the members of the instant political party at around 18:00 on September 17, 1978.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the same reasons above.

Judges Kim Young-jin (Presiding Judge)