(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.12.01 2016노2991 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.12.01 2016노2991

공직선거법위반

Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

The Defendant, on November 29, 2015, did not introduce the M to the effect that “M is the chairman of the E-political Party Cooperation Party in the E-political Party. It is a part of the National Assembly member election in the year.”

In addition, M was subject to a disposition by the prosecution as to the suspected fact of being subject to an advance election campaign against the above eight persons at the time and place.

Nevertheless, the court below erred in finding the defendant guilty of a third party's contribution act for M.

Punishments (fines 800,000) sentenced by the court below of unfair sentencing are too unlimited and unfair.

The punishment sentenced by the court below by the public prosecutor is too uneasible and unfair.

Judgment

In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below claiming the misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the fact that the defendant made a contribution as a local council member as well as the fact that the defendant made a contribution for M to be a candidate for the 20th National Assembly member in relation to the election of the 20th National Assembly member as stated in the court below'

Meanwhile, according to the records, it is acknowledged that M was subject to a disposition by the prosecutor that he was suspected of having committed a prior election campaign at the time of this case, but the third party's contribution act as provided in Articles 257 (1) 1 and 115 of the Public Official Election Act is punished for the relevant contributor, and it is not established only in the case where it is recognized that the donationr and the candidate or the person who wishes to be the candidate are recruited. The above circumstance alone does not obstruct the recognition that the defendant made a third party's contribution act.

Therefore, since there cannot be any error in the fact-finding or judgment of the court below, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

Each of the defendant and prosecutor's arguments on unfair sentencing.

참조조문

-공직선거법 제115조

-공직선거법 제257조 제1항 제1호

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2016.09.09 2016고합140

-창원지방법원 밀양지원 2015.02.13 2014고합47

-대법원 2017.12.22 2017도16596

-광주지방법원 2016.11.11 2016고합396

-창원지방법원 2020.10.15 2020고합166