208Gohap10A. Violation of the Public Official Election Act

208Gohap11(combined) of the Political Funds Act

208Gohap16(combined)(c). Occupational embezzlement

1. A.a.b. Kim○○ (*************) professors.*

Residential Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government distribution ○ 500-0 Olet ○○-dong 0

○○ Dong-dong ○○○ in the East Sea of Original domicile

2. A. (a) Kim △△△△ (***********) and Company Council members.

In the case of a residential space, ○○○○○○ apartment ○○○ Dong 00

Standard place of registration 00 p.m.

3.(a).A.D.(c) ○○○************) and ○○ representative director.

○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ Dong-ho, Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si ○○○○

Reference domicile Jongno-gu Seoul Jongno-dong 00

4. A.A.D.D. (**************)**), ○○ Co., Ltd.

Seoul Special Metropolitan City Nowon-gu ○○○

Reference domicile in Seongbuk-gu Seoul OOdong 96

5. A. Ga. Ga. Ma○○ (***********)) and non-permanent post.

Enforcement Decree of the Gangwon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City ○○○○○-○○

Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City ○○○ 000

6. A.I.D., ○○○ (*************), Taeba (President)

Residential Taek-si ○○ Dong 0

[Reference domicile] OOBO 00

Completion Materials

Attorney Kim Tae-tae (Presiding Justice Kim Il-tae, and Justice Kim △△△)

Attorney Song Jong-hun, et al. (for defendant Kim Jong-○, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Law Firm Geosung, Attorneys Park Dong-young (Defendant Sung-so, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

June 5, 2008

Defendant 1’s violation of the Public Official Election Act, No. 1’s violation of the Public Official Election Act, No. 1’s violation of the Political Funds Act, No. 1-B(2) as to Defendant 1’s violation of the Political Funds Act, and No. 1-B(2) as to Defendant 1’s violation of the Political Funds Act, Defendant 2’s violation of the Public Official Election Act as to Defendant 1’s violation of the Political Funds Act, shall be punished by imprisonment for 2 months, Defendant 1’s violation of the Political Funds Act, for 6 months, by imprisonment for 6 months, Defendant 2’s violation of the Political Funds Act, and for 7,00,000,000, Defendant 10, and Defendant 2-A’s violation of the Political Funds Act.

When Defendant Kim Jong-si, Park ○○, and Go-○○ did not pay the above fine, the pertinent Defendant shall be confined in each old-age room for the period calculated by converting KRW 50,000 each day into one day. The pertinent 62 days of detention days prior to the issuance of the judgment shall be included in the above punishment on the violation of the Public Official Election Act by Article 1-A of the Decision on Defendant Kim○-○, and 2-1 of the Decision on the 62 days of detention days prior to the issuance of the judgment, and the above punishment on the violation of the Political Funds Act by Article 2-A of the Decision on Defendant Kim△-△△△, and the

However, with respect to the defendant Kim ○, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The combination of seized one million Won (No. 1), 50 million Won (Evidence No. 2), 500 million Won (Evidence No. 2), 900 million Won Won (Evidence No. 3), 1000 million Won one (Evidence No. 4), 2200 (Evidence No. 5), 2200 (Evidence No. 5), 1 (Evidence No. 6) one cashier's check issued by the National Bank shall be confiscated from the △△△△△△△△, each of the defendants.

The 54,590,740 won from Defendant Kim ○○, and 13,654,560 won from Defendant Kim △△△△ shall be collected respectively.

Criminal facts

Defendant ○○○○ was officially recruited as a candidate for the 000 election for the 18th National Assembly member of the National Assembly, for the 18th National Assembly member of the National Assembly, and resigned prior to candidate registration; Defendant Kim △△△△ established an election campaign plan by Defendant Kim ○; organized and operated an election campaign organization; Defendant Kim ○ was a person in charge of planning and operating an election campaign; Defendant Kim ○ was a representative director of the company 000 (hereinafter referred to as “00”); Defendant Kim ○; Defendant Kim ○ was a person in charge of overall accounting and other duties; Defendant Park ○ on December 20, 2007, registered as a person in charge of accounting of Defendant Kim ○○ on December 20, 2007; and Defendant Ko ○○ was a person working as a warden at the Young-gu Election Commission on December 20, 2000.

1. Defendant Kim○-○

A. Violation of the Public Official Election Act

1) No person shall direct, induce or demand contributions for a candidate, etc. in connection with an election.

Defendant ○○, around October 2007, stated that “Defendant ○○, who is his relative and the representative director of OOO, has a person in Gangwon-do, who is a senior director of the 18th National Assembly member election campaign, etc., he requested Defendant Kim △△△△△ to provide money as a salary to Defendant Kim △△△△△△, who was in charge of planning the 18th National Assembly member election campaign at his 18th National Assembly member, and contributed money to Defendant Kim △△△△, as shown in the attached list of crimes (2).

2) Except in cases where allowances, actual expenses, and other benefits under the Public Official Election Act are provided, no money, valuables, or other benefits shall be provided in connection with an election campaign regardless of the pretext, such as allowances, actual expenses, and other compensation for volunteer services. Defendant Kim ○○ issued KRW 41 million to the △△△△△△△ in the Gangwon-do ○○○○○○○○, Gangwon-do Jong-gun, Jung-gun, Gangwon-do, for the election campaign.

B. Violation of the Political Funds Act

1) No person may receive any contribution of any political fund unless it is provided for in the Political Funds Act.

around April 2007, Defendant 1 asked Defendant Kim ○-○ to subsidize expenses incurred in political activities at a mutually influence restaurant located in Seoul, and Defendant KimO and Kim Jong-dong paid KRW 54,590,740,00 from around May 14, 2007, the expenses incurred in managing contact offices for political activities of Defendant KimO to be a candidate at the ○○○○○○○ Office located in Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government election for the 18th National Assembly members of the National Assembly at around May 14, 2007 and paid KRW 97,940,00 from that time to time in the name of OO in the name of OO.

Therefore, Defendant Kim ○ received political funds from Defendant Kim 00 and Kim Kim in lieu of the expenses required for his political activities, and received political funds in a way that is not prescribed by the Political Funds Act.

2) Where a preliminary candidate disburses political funds, he shall do so through a person in charge of accounting.

On January 15, 2008, Defendant Kim 00 deposited KRW 20 million in the public opinion poll account with the agricultural bank account in the name of Defendant Kim 00, who did not report to the election commission at a non-permanent district in Seoul.

In addition, Defendant Kim △△△, a person in charge of accounting of Defendant Kim 00, possessed the above agricultural bank account and took charge of its disbursement, and reported the details thereof to Defendant Kim ○○. Defendant Kim △△△△ withdrawal of KRW 10 million from the above agricultural bank account on February 4, 2008 from the above agricultural bank account, and KRW 6 million on February 25, 2008 from the above agricultural bank account, and deposited KRW 6 million from February 25, 2008 to the ○○○○○○○○○ book, a public opinion poll institution. Defendant Kim ○○, without going through a person in charge of accounting, disbursed political funds as above.

2. Defendant Kim △△△

A. Violation of the Public Official Election Act

1) No one may receive a donation from a third party regarding an election. Defendant Kim △△△△△ received a total of KRW 13,654,560 as indicated in the separate crime list (2) from Defendant Kim○○○○○○ representative director upon the request of Defendant Kim○○○○○○, who received an election preparation and election campaign at his home located in the OOdong from October 25, 2007 to March 25, 2008.

2) Except in cases where allowances, actual expenses, and other benefits under the Public Official Election Act are provided, no money, valuables, or other benefits shall be provided in connection with an election campaign regardless of the pretext, such as allowances, actual expenses, and compensation for volunteer service. Defendant Kim △△△△ received KRW 41 million from ○○○ in ○○○○ in the Jung-gun, Gangwon-do Jung-gun, Jung-gun, Gangwon-do, on March 24, 2008, and received money and valuables in relation to the election campaign.

3) In order to influence the election from 180 days before the election day to the election day, no one may distribute, post, spread, present, or post advertisements, personnel management books, posters, photographs, documents, pictures, printed materials, sound or visual tapes, or other similar things, including contents supporting, recommending, or opposing a political party or candidate, without following the provisions of the Public Official Election Act. Defendant Kim △△△△△△△ on February 23, 2008, at the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ number of candidates for the general public opinion polls, by sending a mobile phone text message to 114 electors.

B. The expenditure of political funds in violation of the Political Funds Act may be disbursed only by the person in charge of accounting, and when intending to delegate the same, it shall be delegated in writing, setting the purpose and scope of the expenditure amount, and shall be disbursed through the deposit account reported to the competent election commission. Defendant Kim △△△△△△ on November 15, 2007, a public opinion poll institution located in the Dong-dong Seoul Metropolitan Government, requested an election-related public opinion poll on ten occasions until March 22, 2008, conducted a public opinion poll on ten occasions, and thereafter Defendant Kim △△△△△△△, a person in charge of accounting, who was not a person in charge of accounting, withdrawn KRW 10 million from the above Agricultural Account in the name of Defendant Kim ○○ (036-12-0636) under the name of Defendant Kim ○○, who was not reported on February 4, 2008 to deposit KRW 25 million in the passbook and deposit KRW 600,000.

Therefore, Defendant Kim △△, a person in charge of accounting of the above election, did not go through the deposit account reported to the competent election commission and disbursed political funds.

3. Defendant Kim 00, Kim Jong-tae

A. Violation of the Political Funds Act

No one shall contribute any political fund unless it is provided for in the Political Funds Act.

around April 2007, Defendant ○○ asked Defendant Kim○-○ to provide subsidies for expenses incurred in political activities in his relative and 18th National Assembly members election at the mutually in Seoul around 2007.

Defendant Kim Jong-ok, who had overall control over ○○○○○’s accounting affairs, ordered Defendant Kim Jong-tae to subsidize expenses requested by Defendant Kim Jong-○. On May 14, 2007, Defendant Kim Jong-tae paid KRW 97,940 to Defendant Kim Young-dong’s liaison office management expenses for the political activities of Defendant Kim Jong-○, who wishes to be a candidate at the ○○○○ Office located in Seocho-gu Seoul Seo-dong, under the name of KRW 000, and paid KRW 54,590,740 in total for the political activities of Kim Jong-○, as shown in the attached crime list (1) from that time. As a result, Defendant Kim Kim-○ and Kim Jong-dong conspired to contribute political funds without using the method set forth in the Political Funds Act.

B. Violation of the Public Official Election Act

A person is prohibited from making contributions to the electorate, etc. for a candidate in connection with an election. Around October 2007, Defendant Kim ○ requested Defendant Kim △△△△ to provide money as salary to Defendant Kim △△△△△△ in charge of planning an election campaign for the 18th National Assembly member from Defendant Kim 00 at a mutually influent restaurant located in Seoul, Seoul, Seoul, and thus ordered Defendant Kim ○○ to register Defendant Kim △△△△△△ as a company member and pay money for the monthly salary. Accordingly, Defendant Kim ○ instructed Defendant Kim ○ to make contributions from October 25, 2007 to March 25, 2008, in collusion with Defendant Kim ○○, Defendant Kim ○ at the OO’s office from around October 25, 2007 to Defendant Kim △△△△△△△△△, as indicated in the attached list of crimes (2).

Defendant Kim 00 received a request for payment of funds necessary for political activities by the pro-Japanese Kim ○○.

Upon receipt of the above request, Defendant Kim 00 directed Defendant Kim Jong-so that he would pay the funds for the political activities of Kim O as company funds. Accordingly, Defendant Kim Jong-so, in collusion with Defendant Kim ○○ on May 14, 2007, 97,940 won, which was while on duty for the victim’s ○○○○○○○○’s political activities, was disbursed for the management expenses of the liaison office for the political activities of Defendant Kim ○○○○○○○, from that time to that time, as indicated in the attached list of crimes (1), and (2), he embezzled KRW 68,245,300, which was owned by Defendant Kim ○○○, as indicated in the attached list of crimes (1), and (2).

4. Defendant’s gambling ○

No one shall direct, induce or request contributions for a candidate in connection with an election.

On February 3, 2008, Defendant Park Jong-○, who was in charge of the election campaign planning of Defendant Kim○ at the election office of Defendant Kim○○ at the office of candidate Kim Young-gun located in Gangwon-gun, Gangwon-do on February 3, 2008, was in charge of the election campaign of Defendant Kim○, and the head of △△△△△△, who was in charge of the election campaign planning of Defendant Kim○○, shall not be subject to the restrictions on the local person responsible for the region that was created under the main text of this case. However, he sent to the third party, who was the third party, and recommended him to make contributions.

5. Defendant 1’s high-level

No one may distribute, post, distribute, display, or post any advertisement, personnel management book, poster, photograph, document, drawing, printed matter, tape-recording, video-recording, or other similar things, which includes contents supporting, recommending, or opposing a political party or candidate, without following the provisions of the Public Official Election Act, from 180 days before the election day to the election day. Defendant high ○○○ also distributed a mobile phone text message to 20 electors in relation to the above public opinion poll on February 25, 2008, by means of law, on 27,28 days after the ○○ ○○ Dog decided as a candidate for the last two candidates for ○○○ ○○○○○ Dog,” and then distributed a document, etc. by sending a mobile phone text message to the public opinion poll to the effect that “The ○○ Dog National Assembly’s Dog was a candidate for the last 27,28 days.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of the Defendants (Provided, That in the case of Defendant Kim○, Kim △△, Kim △△, Kim○, and Kim Jong-dong, part of each legal statement)

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of interrogation of the Defendants (including part of the 6th interrogation protocol of the Defendant Kim △△△△△△△ and part of the 7th interrogation protocol of the Defendant Kim △△△△△△△△, but some of the interrogation protocol in the case of the Defendant KimO, Kim △△△△△△, Kim 00, and Kim

1. Each prosecutor’s protocol of statement concerning Kim Jong-gu, Ma-○, Ma-○, Ma-○, and Ma-○;

1. Each police statement on the bestO, static, Kim 00, Gao, Park ○, Mao, Mao, Red, and Park ○;

1. Each protocol of seizure;

1. Investigation report (verification of suspect Kim00, Kim △△△△△△△△△△ movement), investigation report (verification of the location of Nonghyup 00 branch office and bank code number), investigation report (verification of the official process of 000 Dog00), investigation report (verification of the contents of a survey and the contents of a contract with 000 Dogbook), investigation report (verification of the contents of a survey and the contents of a contract), investigation report (the status of preliminary candidate), investigation report (the counter investigation of mobile phone users), investigation report (01-00-000 mobile phone users), investigation report (the counter investigation of mobile phone users), investigation report (01-00-000 mobile telephone users), investigation report (010-00 mobile telephone users counter investigation);

1. Copy of Kim △△△’s pocket book, copy of the Kim △△△’s book, Kim ○○ KFK’s book, revenue and expenditure book of political funds, suspect Kim Handphone’s telephone call records, (ju) interview interview paper, suspect Kim △△△△△△△ and Kim ○○○, Defendant’s telephone account records, (ju), investigation progress and map, (ju) copy of the passbook’s national bank account book, business registration certificate, tax invoice, books, financial statements, remittance certificate, copy of the contract, Kim ○○○○○○○, and operating expenses in the name of Kim ○○○○○○○, immediately before the account, ○○○○○○○○, Kim △△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△’s account records, details of the passbook’s account, Kim ○○’s account receipt, contents of the account delivery, Kim △△△△△△△△△△△’s account records, details of the domestic data on the operation of Kim △△△△△○ account records, and information about the receipts.

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes, including the field photographs of each search and seizure site, each seized article photograph, ○○ cafeteria, books and photographs of money, text messages sent by Kim △△△△△△, photographs of text messages, and text messages sent by Kim △△△△△△, and the contents and photographs of text messages sent by Kim △

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Defendant ○○○: Articles 257(2) and 116 (a) of the Public Official Election Act; Articles 230(1)4 and 135(3) of the Public Official Election Act; Article 45(1) of the Political Funds Act (the provision of money and valuables related to election campaign); Articles 47(1)8 and 36(3) of the Political Funds Act (the receipt and payment of political funds, including the receipt and payment of money and valuables related to election campaign); Articles 47(1)8 and 36(3) of the Political Funds Act (the receipt and disbursement of political funds that are

Defendant Kim △△△△: Articles 257(2), 116(2), and 230(1)5 and 4, and 135(3) of the Public Official Election Act (the receipt of money and valuables related to election campaign), Articles 255(2)5 and 93(1) of the Public Official Election Act (the distribution of documents by illegal means), Articles 47(1)8, 36(1)8, 47(1)9, and 36(2) of the Political Funds Act (the receipt and disbursement of political funds by a person other than a person in charge of accounting), Defendant Kim OO, ○○○○○○, and Article 257(1)1 and 115 of the Public Official Election Act, Article 25(2)5 of the Public Official Election Act (the receipt and payment of money and valuables related to election), Article 255(2)5 and 93(1) of the Public Official Election Act (the distribution of documents by illegal means), Article 30(1) of the Political Funds Act, comprehensively Article 5(30(3) of the Criminal Act

Defendant Park ○: Articles 257(2) and 116 of the Public Official Election Act (the act of soliciting contribution to a third party)

Defendant High ○○: Article 255(2)5 and Article 93(1) of the Public Official Election Act (a point of distributing documents by unlawful means)

1. Commercial competition;

Defendant Kim △△△, KimO-O, and Kim: Articles 40 and 50 (1) of each Criminal Act (i) Defendant Kim △△△△△△; between the violation of the Political Funds Act due to the receipt and disbursement of political funds by a person other than a person in charge of accounting; and the violation of the Political Funds Act due to the receipt and disbursement of political funds not through a deposit account reported; and punishment provided for the violation of the Political Funds Act due to the receipt and disbursement of political funds by a person who is not a person with a heavier accounting; (ii) Defendant KimO, and KimO-O: Punishment provided for the violation of the Public Official Election Act and the violation of the Political Funds Act;

1. Selection of punishment;

In regard to the crime of violation of the Public Official Election Act and the crime of violation of the Political Funds Act against the rest of the Defendants except Defendant Park ○○, Go ○○, and Go ○○, each of the fines on the crime of imprisonment, the crime of occupational embezzlement against Defendant Kim 00, the selection of a fine on the crime of occupational embezzlement against Defendant Kim Kim Jong, the selection of a fine on the crime of occupational embezzlement against Defendant Kim ○,

1. Separation of concurrent crimes;

Defendant ○○○○ and Kim △△△△: Article 18(3) of the Public Official Election Act ( ① Violation of the Public Official Election Act and the Political Funds Act due to the illegal receipt of political funds shall be separately examined from the violation of the Political Funds Act due to the receipt and disbursement of political funds not by the person in charge of accounting and sentenced to a punishment separately. ② Defendant Kim △△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△ Nonindicted separate examination of the violation of the Political

Defendant KimO-O and KimO-O: The prosecutor tried to separate the part concerning the violation of the Public Official Election Act and the violation of the Political Funds Act (hereinafter referred to as "election crime"), which are judged against Defendant KimO and Kim○, from the part concerning the crime of violation of the Political Funds Act (hereinafter referred to as "election crime"), and the part concerning the crime of occupational embezzlement. However, with respect to other crimes in a commercial concurrent relationship with an election criminal, under Article 40 of the Public Official Election Act, the punishment for the most severe crime should be imposed. In such a case, regardless of whether the most severe crime is an election crime, all the crimes in a commercial concurrent relationship with an election criminal should be treated as an election crime (see Supreme Court Decision 9Do636, Apr. 23, 199), and without sentencing a separate punishment in this case, and should be punished as a more severe occupational embezzlement.

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Defendant ○○○, Kim △△△△△: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (i) the crime of violating the Public Official Election Act and the crime of violating the Political Funds Act due to the illegal receipt of political funds shall be aggravated punishment for the crime of violating the Public Official Election Act due to the provision of money and valuables related to the election campaign, the most severe punishment and the nature of the crime, and (ii) the punishment for the crime of violating the Public Official Election Act due to the provision of money and valuables related to the election campaign, shall be aggravated punishment for each

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Defendant Kim Jong-be, Park ○, and Go-○○: Articles 70 and 69(2) of each Criminal Act

1. Inclusion of days of detention in detention;

Defendant KimO, Kim △△△, and KimO: Article 57 of each Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution;

Defendant ○○○: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (Consideration of sentencing)

1. Confiscation;

Defendant Kim △△△: Article 236 of the Public Official Election Act

1. Additional collection:

Defendant Kim 00: Judgment on the assertion of Defendant Kim △△△△△ under the proviso of Article 257(4) of the Public Official Election Act, Defendant Kim ○, Kim △△△, Kim △△, Kim ○, Kim ○, and his defense counsel

1. Violation of the Public Official Election Act due to the provision and receipt of money and valuables related to the election campaign of Defendant Kim○○ and Kim △△△.

A. Summary of the assertion

Around March 24, 2008, Defendant ○○○ delivered KRW 41 million to Defendant Kim △△△△△△△ on or around March 24, 2008, to Defendant 1, as well as the delivery of KRW 41 million to the account passbook for election expenses, not for the purpose of delivering it to the voters. Thus, the crime of violating the Public Official Election Act is not established due to the provision of money and valuables

(b) Markets:

1) There is no reason to deny the appropriateness of eradicating the presidential election in Korea’s electoral climate. However, in most cases, where a candidate or his/her spouse immediately grants money and valuables to the right holder, it is extremely rare and most cases where a candidate or his/her spouse grants money and valuables to a person in charge of election affairs, and thus, it is widely distributed to many final voters by expanding the scope of money and valuables through several interim stages. The whole or part of money and valuables are useful in the process. Nevertheless, it is extremely difficult to clarify the whole process. Under such circumstances, if only giving money and valuables to a person who ultimately receives money and valuables should be subject to punishment, the legislative purpose cannot be achieved to eradicate the presidential election, and even if it was made at the middle stage, it is very urgent to punish him/her if the money and valuables are distributed, not to a person who has received money and valuables, but to a specific person who has received money and valuables or other benefits, and the so-called "money and valuables or other benefits to whom the money and valuables belong" should be distributed to the specific person.

As long as there is room, giving money and valuables to an intermediary who is not a final right holder is included in "providing money and valuables" under the above provision. Therefore, in order to determine whether a candidate, etc. gives money and valuables to an intermediary who is not a final right holder, it is provided to an intermediary for use in an unlawful election, such as securing support marks by purchasing an unspecified number of voters, not simply keeping or representing the intermediary, and it is sufficient for the intermediary to have the above meaning discretion. Whether he/she received money and valuables, in whole or in part, the use of the money and valuables, and whether the use of the money and valuables was identified in all, shall not affect the crime already established. On the other hand, in order to determine whether the intermediary had the above meaning discretion at the time of receiving money and valuables from a candidate, etc., it shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the relation with the candidate, etc., the motive and circumstances leading up to the receipt of the money and valuables, the use method and overall circumstances at the time of the election, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2001Do2962.).

2) 나아가 이 사건에 관하여 살피건대, 앞서 채택된 증거들에 의하면, ① 피고인김○○는 2007.경부터 제18대 국회의원 선거에서 태백, 정선, 영월, 평창 선거구의 ○○○당 후보로 공천을 받기 위해 준비를 하여 온 사실, ② 한편 2000. 4.경에 치러진 제16대 총선 당시 피고인 김○○의 회계책임자였던 피고인 김△△는 2007. 2.경부터 피고인 김00의 공천 및 당선을 위해 선거운동과 관련하여 향후 계획을 수립하거나 여론 동향을 살피는 등의 일을 하였고, 피고인 김○○의 지역행사 일정 등을 관리하면서 피고인 김OO를 수행하여 지역행사에 참석하였으며, 피고인 김OO에게 읍면별 책임자를 조직하는 등 조직선거를 해야 한다고 지속적으로 건의한 사실, ③ 피고인 김A는 피고인 김○○ 명의로 농협에 계좌(계좌번호 ①00-00-000000, 이하 '회 계통장'이라고 한다.)를 개설한 후 영월선거관리위원회에 회계책임자로 등록된 피고인박○○에게 관리를 맡겼으며, 선거홍보물이나 유세차량 등과 관련된 계약체결 또한 피고인 김○○의 간섭없이 직접하였고, 그 비용 지출에 관하여 피고인 박○○에게 지시.를 한 사실, ④ 피고인 김△△는 회계통장과 별도로 피고인 김○○ 명의의 농협계좌(계좌번호 000-00-000000, 이하 '실무통장'이라고 한다.)를 관리하면서 선거와 관련하여 여론조사 비용 등 필요한 비용을 자신의 판단 하에 지출하였고, 피고인 김○○가 실무통장에 선거비용을 입금하면 이를 다시 회계통장으로 계좌이체하기도 한 사실, ⑤ 피고인 김△△는 2008. 1.경 광고대행업체인 주식회사 ○○○(이하 '○○○'이라고 한다.)과 대금을 6,800만 원으로 하여 피고인 김00의 선거홍보물 등 제작 계약을 체결하였고, ○○○으로 하여금 2007.12.31. 및 2008.3.20. 각 2,200만 원씩 합계 4,400만 원을 지급하도록 요청하였으며, 피고인 박○○으로 하여금 2008. 1. 31. 회계통장에서 2,200만 원을 입금하여 주도록 한 사실, ⑥ 피고인 김△△는 2008. 3. 19. 피고인 김○○에게 기획팀이 홍보물과 TV 토론을 준비하고 있는데 운영비를 지원해 달라는 내용의 이메일을 보낸 사실, ⑦ 한편 피고인 김○○는 2008. 3. 19. 23:00경 ○○○당 공천이 확정되자 2008. 3. 20. 서울에서 춘천시 남면으로 내려왔고, 다음날부터 강원 영월, 태백시 등에서 명함을 돌리는 등 선거운동을 하던 중 2008.24. 17:00경 강원 정선군 정선읍 봉양리 소재 00약국 3층에 있는 선거연락소 사무실에서 개최된 ○○○당 당원 40여명과의 모임에 피고인 김△△와 함께 참석한 사실, ⑧ 피고인 김○○는 그 모임이 끝나자 같은 날 18:20경 피고인 김△△를 김□□가 운전하는 자신의 승용차에 태우고 선거연락소 사무실에서 300미터 정도 떨어져 있는 농협 ○○○ 지부 옆 도로상으로 가 승용차를 정차하게 한 다음, 차량 트렁크에서 현금이 들어있는 검정색 비닐봉지를 꺼내 피고인 김△△에게 전달하였는데, 당시 피고인 김△△는 주위를 살피면서 피고인 김○○로부터 위 비닐봉지를 교부받은 사실, ⑨ 피고인 김○○는 위 비닐봉지를 전달한 후 다시 피고인 김△△를 태우고 선거연락소 사무실 근처로 되돌아와서 피고인 김△△를 내려주고 영월로 간 사실, ① 그러자 피고인 김△△는 위 비닐 봉지를 자신의 승용차에 넣은 후 선거연락소 사무실 근처에 있는 00 식당에서 모임에 참석한 ○○○당 당원들과 저녁식사를 하였고, 한편 정선선거관리위원회 선거부정 감시단원이 위와 같이 피고인 김○○가 검정색 비닐봉지를 피고인 김△△에게 전달하는 것을 적발하여 정선선거관리위원회에 신고한 사실, ① 피고인 김△△는 저녁식사를 하하고 같은 날 19:45경 강원 정선군 북평면에 있는 선배 배00의 집으로 향하다가 선거관리위원회 직원의 신고를 받고 뒤쫓아 온 경찰과 선거관리위원회 직원들로부터 선거연락소 사무실로부터 6킬로미터 정도 떨어져 있는 같은 면에 있는 남평문화마을 입구 노상에서 제지를 당하였고, 경찰이 차량수색 등을 요구하자 그때부터 2시간 가량 승용차 문을 잠그고 이를 거부하다가 같은 날 21:50경 현행범으로 체포된 사실, ⑫ 피고인김△△가 체포된 이후 승용차 안에서 만원권을 다발로 만든 돈뭉치가 발견되었는데, 승용차 운전석 밑에서 백만 원 묶음 19개 1,900만 원, 오십만 원 묶음 22개 1,100만 원이, 조수석 사물함 안에서 백만 원 묶음 1개 100만 원이 발견되어 합계 3,100만 원이 발견되었고, 피고인 김△△의 상의 안주머니에 있던 지갑 안에서 1,000만 원권 자기앞수표 1장(바가03449078)이 발견되었으며, 피고인 김○○의 명함 4,400여장, 정선군민 명단 85매 등이 발견된 사실, ③ 피고인 김△△는 경찰 제1회 피의자신문시 피고인김○○로부터 후보등록 후 사용할 공식선거비용 중 선거홍보물 인쇄비 및 홍보차량 계약 잔금으로 약 4,000만 원 정도를 받았고, 조수석 사물함 내에서 발견된 100만 원은 자신의 것이라고 진술하다가, 경찰 제2, 3회 피의자신문시에는 피고인 김C)로부터 회계통장에 입금하라는 지시를 받고 위 돈을 교부받은 것이고, 자신은 피고인 김○○의 보좌관이나 선거운동원은 아니지만 오래된 인연으로 선거운동을 도와주는 것뿐이라고 진술한 사실, 14 그리고 피고인 김△△는 검찰에서 000으로부터 선거홍보물 제작대 금 4,000만 원의 지급독촉을 받아 이를 지급하기 위해 피고인 김○○로부터 위 금원을 교부받았다고 진술하였으나, ○○○의 대표이사 전○○는 검찰에서 하도급업체로부터 대금을 독촉받는 상황이 아니었고, 자신도 피고인 김△△에게 대금지급을 독촉할 상황

은 아니었다고 진술한 사실, 1⑤ 한편 2007. 12. 24.부터 이 사건 발생일인 2008. 3. 24.까지 회계통장에 입금된 공식선거비용 전액은 계좌이체 방식으로 입금되었고, 피고인김△△가 2008. 3. 24. 15:14경 자신이 직접 실무통장에서 회계 통장으로 1억 원을 계좌이체하였으며, 같은 날 000당으로부터 1,500만 원이 입금되어 당시 회계통장에 총 1억 1,500여만 원 상당의 잔액이 남아 있었던 사실, 16 피고인 박○○은 경찰에서 2008. 3. 25. 및 같은 달 26.에 로고송제작비 및 방송연설비, 차량임대비 등으로 약 5,700여만 원이 필요했으나 회계통장에 1억 원이 넘는 돈이 있어 피고인 김△△에게 급히 돈을 요청할 사안은 아니었고, 선거사무원들에 대한 수당은 선거를 진행하면서 차차 지급하면 된다고 진술한 사실, 17 그런데 피고인 김○○는 수사기관에서 피고인김△△에게 2008. 3. 23. 3,000만 원을, 다음날인 같은 달 24. 18:00경 1,100만 원을 각 교부하였고, 위 금원을 교부한 이유에 대하여 피고인 박○○의 진술과는 달리 피고인박○○이 사무실 임대료 및 선거비용 명목으로 약 3,000만 원 정도를 요구하여 회계통장에 입금하라고 교부한 것이라고 진술한 사실, 1⑧ 피고인 박○○이 2008. 2. 4. 피고인 김스스에게 "중요한건 명절 밑에 지금까지 만들어 놓은 지역 책임자들에게 뭔가 있어야 안되겠나, 물론 알고 있겠고 답답하겠지만 지금이 가장 적절하다고 보는데"라는 내용의 이메일을 보냈는데, 피고인 박○○은 경찰에서 이는 피고인 김○○를 위해 일하고 있는 C00당 지역 책임자들에게 돈을 좀 주라는 뜻이었다고 진술한 사실, 19 피고인 김OO는 피고인 김△△가 돈이 필요하다고 요청하면 그에 따라 실무통장에 돈을 입금하였고, 피고인 김△△는 자신이 세운 계획에 따라 비용을 지출한 후 피고인김○○에게 그 지출내역을 보고한 사실(피고인 김○○는 피고인 김△△의 요청으로 2007. 12. 2. 325만 원, 같은 달 3. 100만 원, 같은 달 8. 및 10. 각 300만 원, 같은 달 21. 800만 원 등을 실무통장으로 입금하여 준 적이 있고, 한편 피고인 김△△는 자신의 재량으로 2008. 2. 4. 및 같은 달 25. 실무통장에서 인출하여 여론조사비용 1,600만 원을, 2008. 2. 25. 정선군 체육지도자에게 180만 원을 각 지출하는 등 선거비용을 지출한 후 피고인 김00에게 보고하는 형식을 취하였다.), 20 피고인 김△△는 피고인김소에게 ○○○에 대한 홍보물 제작대금 중 일부인 4,400만 원을 송금하여 줄 것을 직접 요구하였고, 이에 피고인 김소이 2회에 걸쳐 ○○○에게 이를 송금하여 준 사실, ① 피고인 김△△는 태백시 조직명부를 작성하고, 피고인 김○○에게 홍보위원 명단을 송부하거나 피고인 박00에게 부탁하여 영월지역 책임자 명단을 송부받는 등 선거관련 책임자를 조직, 관리한 사실, 22 피고인 김△△가 작성하여 피고인 김○○에게 전달한 '현황 및 향후 계획안'에는 가시적인 형태의 조직을 갖추어야 하고, 조직확대를 위한 소요자금 산출 및 집행계획 수립이 논의되어야 하며, 피고인 김○○에 대하여 태백, 정선에서 돈을 안쓴다는 부정적 인식이 만연해 있다고 기재되어 있고, '계획서'에는 조직 구축 및 활동에 관한 내용이 단계별로 정리되어 있는 사실, ②3 피고인 김○○는 자신의 주식, 채권 등을 관리하는 최○○에게 지시하여 주식 등을 처분한 현금 4억 여원을 MMF(투자신탁회사가 고객들의 자금을 모아 펀드를 구성한 다음 금리가 높은 만기 1년 미만의 기업어음, 양도성예금증서 등 주로 단기금융상품에 집중 투자하여 얻은 수익을 고객에게 되돌려주는 만기 30일 이내의 초단기금융상품)로 전환하였고, 최○○는 2008. 3. 20. 피고인 김○○의 지시로 같은 달 24. 1억 500만 원을 실무통장으로 계좌이체시키고, 현금으로 즉시 인출할 수 있는 7,800만 원 중 3,000만 원을 인출하여 보관하고 있던 사실을 인정할 수 있다.

앞서 본 사실에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정, 즉 ① 수수된 금원이 위 피고인들의 주장과 같이 회계 통장에 입금될 정상적인 용도의 금원이라면 위 피고인들이 굳이 차를 타고 선거연락소 사무실에서 300미터 정도 떨어진 곳으로 이동하여 은밀히 금원을 제공, 수수한 후 다시 위 사무실 근처로 되돌아 올 이유가 없고, 피고인 김AA가 이를 자신의 승용차 운전석 밑이나 조수석 사물함 등에 은닉할 이유가 없으며, 승용차 문을 잠그고 2시간이 넘도록 경찰의 수색 요구에 불응할 이유가 없어 보이는 점, ② 수수된 금원의 사용용도에 관하여 피고인 김△△의 진술이 일관되지 못하고, 사용용도 및 금원의 교부시기 등에 관하여 피고인 김○○의 진술과 일치하지 않는 점, ③ 피고인 김○○가 수사기관에서의 진술과 같이 2008. 3. 23. 3,000만 원을 피고인 김AA에게 교부하였다면, 피고인 김△△가 다음날인 같은 달 24. 1억 500만 원을 실무 통장에서 회계 통장으로 계좌이체하면서 위 3,000만 원을 회계 통장에 입금하지 않았다는 것은 납득하기 어려운 점, ④ 피고인 김○○는 피고인 박○○의 요청으로 사무실 임대료 명목 등으로 4,100만 원을 교부하였다고 하나, 피고인 박○○은 회계 통장에 자금이 충분히 있어 위 피고인들에게 자금을 요청한 적 없고, 선거사무원들에 대한 실비는 나중에 지급하면 되기 때문에 급히 돈이 필요한 상황이 아니었다고 진술하는 등 금원지급 경위에 관하여 피고인 박○○의 진술과도 어긋나는 점, ⑤ 예비후보등록일 무렵부터 2008. 3. 24.까지 계좌이체의 방법으로 회계통장에 선거비용이 입금되었을 뿐 현금이 직접 입금된 적이 한 번도 없었고, 또한 피고인 김△△가 2008. 3. 24. 15:14경 직접 실무통장에서 회계 통장으로 1억 원을 계좌이체하였음에도 입금시간이 지난 18:20경 다시 회계통장에 입금하기 위해 현금 및 자기앞수표 4,100만 원을 교부받았다는 위 피고인들의 변명은 일반인의 경험칙상 도저히 납득하기 어려운 점, ⑥ 설령 후보등록일인 2008. 3. 25. 선거비용이 필요하였다고 하더라도 회계 통장에 1억 1,500만 원이나 입금되어 있어 피고인 김○○가 현금 및 자기앞수표 4,100만 원을 급히 피고인 김△△에게 교부할 필요성이 없었던 점, ⑦ 피고인 김○○는 이미 2008. 3. 20.경 강원 영월로 내려와 그때부터 피고인 김△△를 만나 함께 다녔음에도 2008. 3. 24. 금요일에서 야금융기관의 영업시간이 끝난 18:20 경 회계 통장에 입금하라고 피고인 김AA에게 금원을 교부하였다는 것은 그 역시 납득하기 어려운 점, ⑧ 피고인 김○○는 자신이 직접 또는 최○○에게 지시하여 회계통장에 계좌이체 등의 방법으로 입금하거나 피고인 김△△가 관리하고 있는 실무통장으로 입금한 후 피고인 김△△로 하여금 계좌이체의 방법으로 회계통장에 입금하도록 할 수 있음에도 굳이 현금 및 자기앞수표 4,100만 원을 회계책임자도 아닌 피고인 김△△에게 교부하였는바, 이는 공식적인 선거비용 외에 다른 목적에 사용할 의도가 있다고 밖에 볼 수 없는 점, ⑨ 피고인 박○○도 피고인김△△에게 지역 책임자들에게 돈을 주라는 권유를 한 점, ① 피고인 김△△는 피고인김○○에게 지속적으로 조직선거를 권유하면서 피고인 김○○로부터 선거비용을 자신이 관리하는 실무통장으로 입금받은 후 자신의 재량 하에 이를 지출하고 사후 피고인김○○에게 보고하였고, 회계 통장을 통한 공식 선거비용 지출도 자신이 주도적으로 처리하는 한편, OOO에 대한 선거비용 지원도 직접 요구한 점 등 이 사건 금전수수의 방법, 장소, 피고인 김○○와 피고인 김△△의 관계, 공천 준비과정에서의 피고인 김스 A의 지위 및 역할, 선거비용 지출과 관련한 피고인 김△△의 재량 범위, 피고인 김스 △가 작성한 여러 가지 계획안의 기재 내용, 피고인 김△△가 피고인 김○○ 등에게 보낸 이메일의 내용, 금원수수 당시의 피고인 김00의 자산운용현황 등을 종합하여 보면, 피고인 김△△는 2007.경부터 피고인 김○○의 국회의원 공천 및 당선을 위해 선거운동을 한 자로, 제18대 국회의원 선거와 관련하여 단순한 선거자금관리나 자금전 달자가 아니라 피고인 김○○를 위한 선거운동, 하부조직관리 등에 깊숙히 관여하여 금품 등의 배분대상이나 방법, 배분액수 등에 대한 상당한 정도의 판단과 재량이 있었다고 봄이 상당하고, 따라서 이 사건 금품수수는 피고인 김○○가 회계 통장에 입금하기 위하여 피고인 김△△에게 단순히 이를 보관시키거나 돈 심부름을 시킨 것이 아니라 피고인 김△△로 하여금 불특정 다수의 선거인들을 매수하여 지지표를 확보하는 등의 부정한 선거운동에 사용하도록 제공한 것으로서 공직선거법 제230조 제1항 제5호, 제4호, 제135조 제3항 소정의 '제공'에 해당한다고 할 것이다.

Therefore, the above defendants and their defense counsel's arguments cannot be accepted as they are without merit.

2. The fact that Defendant KimO, Kim00, and Kim Jong-dong's 440 million won political funds frauds

A. Summary of the assertion

40 million won paid to ○○○○ in the name of ○○○○○○○, is merely a loan from Defendant Kim○-○ without an interest agreement, in return for repayment by Defendant Kim○-○.

(b) Markets:

앞서 본 증거들에 의하면, ① 피고인 김○○은 1973.경 미국 미주리 주립대학에 재학 중 인근 웨스트 민스터 칼리지에 유학을 온 ○○그룹 창업주인 김○○의 차남인 피고인 김○○를 만나 친분을 쌓기 시작한 사실, ② 피고인 김○○는 귀국하여 ○○그룹의 계열사인 00000000 주식회사의 대표이사로 근무를 하였고, 피고인 김○○은 1996.경 000을 설립하였는데, 당시 피고인 김OO의 도움으로 00그룹 계열사를 주요 고객으로 확보하는 등 도움을 받은 사실, ③ 피고인 김소은 1983. 10.경 ○○그룹에 입사하여 근무하다가 2006. 3.경 사직하고 ○○○에서 전무로 근무하기 시작한 사실, ④ 피고인 김○○은 안○○ 명의로 피고인 김○○에게 ○○○의 주식 8,000주를 무상으로 공여하기도 한 사실, ⑤ 피고인 김○○은 2007. 초경 피고인 김○○로부터 정치활동에 필요한 경비를 지원해 달라는 부탁을 받고, 그 무렵 피고인 김소 ◇에게 '김박사측에서 도움 요청이 오면 도와줘라'는 지시를 하였고, 그때부터 피고인김이 피고인 김△△와 연락을 주고받으며 피고인 김△△가 임차한 서울 마포 소재 연락사무실 관리비 및 명함제작 비용 등을 000 명의로 대납하여 주기 시작한 사실, ⑥ 피고인 김소은 피고인 김△△로부터 ○○○에 대한 선거홍보물 제작대금을 대납하여 달라는 부탁을 받고 2007. 12. 31. 및 2008. 3. 20. 각 2,200만 원씩 합계 4,400만 원을 000 명의로 지급을 한 후 000의 마케팅 컨설팅 비용으로 회계처리를 한 사실, ⑦ 피고인 김○○, 김소은 피고인 김○○로부터 위 대금지급의 요청을 받을 당시 피고인 김00가 제18대 국회의원 선거에 출마하려 한다는 것과 지급을 요청한 대금이 선거운동 관련 비용이라는 것을 알고 있었던 사실, ⑧ 그런데 위와 같은 대납 과정에서 차용증이 작성되지 아니하였고 이자 약정도 없었던 사실, ④ 피고인 김○○은 검찰에서 피고인 김○○의 부탁으로 2007. 10. 초순경 선거 후 변제받기로 하고 여론조사비용으로 4,000만 원을 빌려주었다고 진술하다가 2007. 12. 하순경 피고인 김○○의 부탁을 받고 빌려주었다고 진술을 번복하였고, 한편 피고인 김○○는 검찰에서 2007. 12. 말경 피고인 김○○에게 현금이 별로 없으니 빌려달라고 한 것인데, 선거 돌입 전인 2008. 3. 말경 변제하기로 하였다고 진술한 사실, ① 피고인 김○○의 계좌에서 현금으로 출금이 가능한 금원이 2007. 12. 말경에는 1억 원 정도였고, 2008. 3. 말경에는 7,800만 원 정도였던 사실을 인정할 수 있는바, 앞서 본 사실에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정, 즉 피고인 김○○, 김소은 2007. 4.경 이미 피고인 김○○의 요청에 따라 선거 관련 비용을 대납하여 주기 시작하였는데, 그 중 위 4,400만 원만을 변제받기로 하고 대여하여 주었다는 위 피고인들의 주장은 설득력이 부족한 점, 위 대납 당시 차용증이 작성되지 아니하였고 이자에 대한 약정도 없었던 점, 위 피고인들은 피고인 김○○이 개인적으로 대여하여 준 것에 불과하다고 주장하나 ○○명의로 ○○○에 직접 입금이 되었고, 000의 정상적인 비용지출인 양 회계처리한 점, 피고인 김이 ○는 2007. 12. 말경 및 2008. 3. 말경 ○○○에 대금을 지급할 충분한 자금이 확보되어 있었던 점, 피고인 김○○의 차용요청 시기 및 사용용도에 관한 진술이 일관되지 아니하고, 이에 관하여 피고인 김○○의 진술과도 어긋나는 점, 피고인 김○○, 김소은 대납 당시 위 대금이 선거관련 비용이라는 사실을 알고 있었던 점에다가, 피고인김○○와 피고인 김○○과의 관계, ○○○과 ○○그룹과의 관계 등을 종합하여 보면, 피고인 김OO, 김소이 공모하여 피고인 김00에게 부정한 방법으로 정치자금을 기부한 사실이 넉넉히 인정되므로, 위 피고인들 및 그 변호인들의 주장은 이유 없어 받아들이지 아니한다.

3. Violation of the Public Official Election Act by Defendant KimO and Kim Jong-dong

A. Summary of the assertion

The purpose of Article 115 of the Public Official Election Act is to prohibit the act of contribution related to the election district or the electorate, and the fact that Defendant Kim ○ paid monthly pay to Defendant Kim △△△ upon the request of Defendant Kim ○○○, not because Defendant Kim △△ was the electorate, but that Defendant Kim △△△△ was attempting to carry out an election campaign by Defendant Kim ○, thereby not constituting a crime of violating the Public Official Election Act.

B. On the one hand, Article 115 of the Public Official Election Act provides that anyone may not make, or make, a contribution to an election on behalf of a candidate or a political party to which he belongs. As such, the purport of the above provision cannot be interpreted as prohibiting a contribution to the election district or the electorate in respect of the election, as alleged by the above Defendants, and therefore, the above Defendants’ act of employing Defendant Kim △△△△, who serves as a key role in the election campaign of Defendant Kim ○ at the request of the above Defendants Kim ○, and paying a monthly salary is a contribution act for the candidate in relation to the election. Thus, the above Defendants and their attorneys’ assertion are without merit.

Grounds for sentencing

1. Defendant Kim ○, Kim △, and Kim △△△△ in violation of the Public Official Election Act, provide and receive money and valuables related to election campaign in violation of the Public Official Election Act, and requested or received contributions by having Defendant Kim △△△△△ in charge of planning the election campaign of Defendant Kim ○○ in the form of employee in charge of the election campaign, and in violation of the Political Funds Act, Defendant Kim ○ illegally received political funds from Defendant Kim ○○ in violation of the Political Funds Act, and disbursed political funds without having the person in charge of accounting. Above all, the above Defendants were the main factors that the above Defendants used our election culture for illegal purposes such as giving and receiving money, which are difficult to promote fair competition in the election and interfere with the proper choice of voters, and which are consistent with the legislative intent of the Public Official Election Act to realize genuine democracy. The above Defendants continued to provide money and valuables to the above Defendants for election campaign, which are equivalent to the above Defendants’ offering and receiving money and valuables for the purpose of the election campaign to the extent that they were found to have not been aware of the fact.

However, the above Defendants did not have the same criminal record, and the Defendants led to the crime of violation of the Public Official Election Act and the violation of the Political Funds Act which was not committed by the person in charge of accounting due to the demand for contribution to a third party, etc., and led to the confession and the misunderstanding. In the case of Defendant Kim ○○, the fact of offering money and valuables was reported to the press, and the withdrawal of candidate position was made, and the above Defendants complaining of sufferings from the pre-permanent election, considering the circumstances favorable to the above Defendants, and considering the various sentencing conditions such as character, conduct and environment of the above Defendants, the sentence identical to

2. Defendant KimO-O and Kim Jong-Un committed the act of making a contribution to a third party with the funds of ○○○○○○○○ in violation of the Public Official Election Act and the Political Funds Act, and at the same time making an illegal donation of political funds, the above Defendants committed the crime continuously for a period of one year, and the amount of embezzlement is not large, and the above Defendants denied the fact of receiving political funds from the investigative agency to this court. In full view of the above facts, the nature of the crime cannot be deemed to be less and less. However, the above Defendants paid for all of the embezzlements; the above Defendants did not have any criminal record; Defendant Kim○-O did not refuse the request due to the pro rata with Defendant Kim○-O; Defendant Kim Jong-O did not refuse to commit the crime in this case; Defendant Kim Jong-O was led to the crime in this case’s former duties, which led to Defendant Kim○○○’s order, taking into account favorable circumstances for the above Defendants; and the above Defendants’ character, conduct and conduct of the above Defendants’ respective orders, as well-mentioned punishment.

3. Defendant Park ○○, in violation of the Public Official Election Act, committed a crime demanding the act of contribution to Defendant Kim △△△△ in violation of the said Public Official Election Act. Considering the fact that the crime committed by the said Defendant cannot be adversely affected by the creation of a fair election climate, which is the foundation of a democratic society, the nature of the crime is somewhat weak, but the above crime is not provided, the above Defendant’s primary crime is not provided, and the fact that the money and valuables are not provided, and the above Defendant’s primary crime is dead and is in contravention of his mistake is considered as favorable to the above Defendant, and the above Defendant is sentenced to the same punishment as the above written in its text, taking into account various sentencing conditions, such as character, behavior

4. The crime of this case by Defendant 1 is deemed to have sent a text message to 20 electors supporting Defendant Kim○, and the nature of the crime is not easy in that the above Defendant’s act undermines the transparency and fairness of election due to the above Defendant’s act. However, the above Defendant’s initial crime and the number of messages sent is low, considering the circumstances favorable to the above Defendant, and considering all other factors of sentencing, such as character, conduct, environment, etc., of the above Defendant’s above Defendant’s above Defendant’s above Defendant’s above, the sentence identical to that indicated in the text is imposed.

The judges of the presiding judge;

Judges Lee Jae-in

Judges Effective Decree