logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원 (전주) 2014.12.02 2014노245
업무방해
Text

All of the appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal - The lower court’s sentence (Defendant C Q: fine of one million won, and the remaining Defendants’ suspended sentence of a fine of one million won) is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Each of the instant crimes committed by the Defendants is a matter that interferes with the competition management business of N political parties by deceptive means by having the Defendants cast proxy voting during the competition for the recommendation of the proportional representative candidate of the 19th National Assembly member election of the National Assembly member and the NAV, AV, AY, BB, BE, and CDR in the course of the competition for the proportional representative candidate of the National Assembly member of the NN political party, and that it infringes on the people's trust that the procedure of the intraparty competition of N political parties would be fair, and damages the fundamental value of representative democracy and proportional representative representation system. The circumstances, including the fact that Defendant Q Q is sentenced to criminal punishment for seven years and six months due to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc., that are disadvantageous to the Defendants.

However, on the other hand, the remaining Defendants except the Defendant Z acknowledged their mistake in the confession of each of the crimes of this case, and the Defendants are deemed to have participated in the act of proxy voting upon the request or request of R, AV, AY, AY, BB, BE, and CR, and they do not seem to have reached the crime of this case, and they are likely to have caused each of the crimes of this case because they failed to sufficiently prepare technical measures to prevent proxy voting while building the online election system, and they did not have any history of having been sentenced to a fine exceeding a fine, and there is no history of being sentenced to a punishment exceeding a fine by Defendant A, CN, P, U, X,Y, and AA, and the remaining Defendants are first offenders who have no specific criminal power.

In light of the aforementioned various circumstances, the lower court’s punishment is different.

arrow