logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2019.02.15 2018고합530
공직선거법위반
Text

Defendant

A A A A with a fine of KRW 900,000, Defendant B with prison labor of October, Defendant C with a fine of KRW 1,000,000, and Defendant D.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A was the winner of the 6th and 7th nationwide local election, who was a preliminary candidate for the 7th nationwide local election for the H party G market at the time of the instant case, and Defendant B was the son of Defendant A, Defendant C is the father of Defendant A, Defendant D is the employee of I (former J) who is the printing company, Defendant E is the friendship of Defendant B, and Defendant F is a volunteer from Defendant A’s election campaign day to planning policies.

H Party GG 200 enacted the detailed rules on the enforcement of the H Party H Party G 2, April 2, 2018. On April 8, 2018, H Party G 2018, the former Do Party: (a) interviewed preliminary candidates including Defendant A on April 8, 2018; (b) conducted a public opinion poll during the period from April 11, 2018 to April 12, 2018; (c) decided Defendant A, K, and L as a competitor according to the results of the said public opinion poll; and (d) conducted the final competition line between April 22, 2018 and April 23, 2018.

1. No one shall direct, induce or induce a number of electorates to answer gender, age, etc. in a false manner in order to influence the results of a public opinion poll for the intra-party competition;

As to the public opinion poll conducted from April 11, 2018 to April 12, 2018, the Defendants confirmed the age, character, and area of the existing public opinion poll conducted by Hparty G market preliminary candidates and the public opinion poll conducted within the limits of the number of samples allocated by age (19 to 39, 40 to 59, and 60 years old), gender, and region. If the number of samples allocated exceeds the number of samples allocated, the Defendants conducted the public opinion poll in a way that no longer conducts the public opinion poll. As such, the Defendants confirmed the age, nature, and area of the existing public opinion poll conducted by the electorate, etc. who responded to the public opinion poll through the Muds or telephone communications, etc.

arrow