logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전고등법원 (청주) 2019.03.28 2019노41
공직선거법위반등
Text

All of the appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to Article 18(3) of the Public Official Election Act with respect to Defendant A, despite the provision of Article 38 of the Criminal Act, the court below, which did not separately examine and sentence Defendant A’s election crimes and non-election crimes, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The lower court’s sentence (Defendant A: a fine of KRW 900,000, a penalty of KRW 3 million, a provisional payment order, Defendant B: a fine of KRW 700,000, and a provisional payment order) against the Defendants on unreasonable sentencing as to the Defendants is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Judgment on the misunderstanding of the legal principles as to Defendant A 1) Article 18(3) of the Public Official Election Act is a crime provided in Article 18(1)3 of the same Act, namely, a crime provided in Chapter 16 Penal Provisions of the Public Official Election Act and a crime of national referendum Act, a crime provided in Articles 45 and 49 of the Political Funds Act, a crime provided in Articles 129 through 132 of the Criminal Act committed by the head of the President, member of the National Assembly, member of local council, and head of local government in connection with his

Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 38 of the Criminal Code, the concurrent crimes that are different from those of the other crimes should be tried and sentenced separately.

The purpose of this is to minimize the impact of other crimes, which are not election crimes, on the sentencing of election crimes, the application of Article 38 of the Criminal Act should be excluded and sentenced separately.

Therefore, the punishment for other crimes in relation to the election crimes and the ordinary concurrent crimes should be imposed under Article 40 of the Criminal Act. In this case, in light of the legislative purport dealing with the election crimes different from the other crimes and the revision history of the provision, the most severe crime to be punished shall not be asked whether or not the election crimes are crimes.

arrow