All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendants and their defense counsel (in fact-finding and misunderstanding of legal principles) distribution of the document distribution method; the sending of the invitation letter of this case and the invitation text message constitutes ordinary and exceptional acts to inform the fact of holding the publishing commemorative meeting guaranteed by the Public Official Election Act; and cannot be deemed to have an intention to influence an election. 2) It is difficult to view that the Defendant’s publicity of his achievements to the candidates of the public official or holding the North contact book as an ordinary and courtesy act to show and publicize his achievements to the public official.

3) Since the fact of a public performance donation act is not a famous person or a famous artist, but a singing without compensation with the Defendant, etc., it does not fall under the requirement of property benefits, which is a prerequisite for the donation act, and it cannot be deemed as a gratuitous donation since a minor public performance is provided to the participants of the Publication Commemorative Meeting who paid the congratulatory money under the pretext of the donation act, and thus, the Defendant B distributed a letter of commitment corresponding to the amount to the participants who paid the congratulatory money at the time of the Publication Commemorative Meeting. Thus, it cannot be deemed as a donation act, since the Defendant B’s donation act constitutes a monetary act and is not a contribution act.

B. The lower court found Defendant B guilty on the confession of Defendant B and its reinforcement evidence as to the fact that Defendant B’s contribution act prior to the Defendant’s letter of intent (in fact-finding, misunderstanding of the legal doctrine, 90,000 won, and 50,000 won, and 300,000 won) was distributed to Z without compensation. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby acquitted the Defendants of this part of the facts charged. 2) The lower court’s sentence (in so doing, 90,000 won, 90,000 won, 90,000 won

2. misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles by the Defendants and their defense counsel.