logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.06.10 2016고합122
공직선거법위반
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000, by a fine of KRW 300,000, and by a fine of KRW 400,00.

Reasons

Criminal facts

Defendant

A is a person who was a prospective candidate H for the 20th National Assembly member in Seoul F District, and Defendant C is a member of the I Assembly belonging to G, and Defendant B was an election campaign worker designated by the said preliminary candidate H.

Except as prescribed by the Public Official Election Act, with the aim of influencing an election from 180 days before the election day to the election day, no one shall distribute, post, spread, screen, or display any advertisement, letter of personnel management, poster, photograph, document, drawing, printed matter, sound or video tape, or other similar things indicating the name of a political party or the name of a candidate or a person who intends to be a candidate, or may directly appeal or appeal for support to the name of a preliminary candidate for the election campaign for the preliminary candidate, but even in such cases, no one shall directly appeal, or appeal for support to the name of a preliminary candidate at an open place, such as the subway station, in which many people pass or gather.

Nevertheless, the Defendants conspired with each other from February 23, 2016 to February 19:27, 2016, as the stairs going up to 1 and 2 from the 18:27 to the 19:16th anniversary of the 1st underground floor of the subway line K 8, K, and the first underground floor of the subway line 8, which is located in SeoulJ, distributed to the majority who passed the place, the phrases, such as “H objection, Ra, 2H,” and approximately 113 name of the preliminary candidate H on which the summary of the said preliminary candidate H was printed, and distributed to the 113th preliminary candidate H;

H The candidate is the same.

It is well asked.

“The” personnel management was conducted.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to support and recommend a person who wishes to be a candidate in a way other than the method prescribed by the Public Official Election Act, including printed matters indicating their names.

arrow