logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2018.11.16 2018고합211
공직선거법위반
Text

Defendant

A A Fines 4,00,000 won, Defendant B’s fine 1,500,000 won, and Defendant C’s fine 80,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is the head of E's election affairs elected after going to the 7th local election D market. Defendant B is the person in charge of accounting, and Defendant C is the head of F apartment G.

1. Defendant A and B’s joint crime - No person who publishes false information for the purpose of election shall publish false information about support from the candidate’s specific person or specific organization in favor of the candidate by means of speech, broadcast, newspaper, communication, magazine, poster, propaganda document, or other means, for the purpose of getting the candidate elected;

Nevertheless, with the intention of having the 7th local election D market elected E, the Defendants were willing to publish false information to the effect that many female electors gather and expressed their desire to support E in the election campaign office of E.

The Defendants indicated in the indictment on March 19, 2018 as “C. 16, 2018.” However, in light of Defendant B’s police statement (350 pages of evidence), and the text message (Evidence No. 1) sent to Defendant B to the reporters, etc., it is obvious that it is a clerical error. Even if it is corrected without the amendment to the indictment, it is not deemed that the amendment would result in a substantial disadvantage to Defendant A and B’s exercise of their rights to defense, and thus, it is corrected ex officio.

H On March 16, 2018, more than 100 female members were gathered in the E election campaign office on March 16, 2018 and expressed their intention to support candidates.

“To the effect that “” posted a letter to E E I, and sent the same content report to local reporters, such as J press, by e-mail, and published the same article.

However, on March 16, 2018, the election campaign office of E had only 30 people in the constituency, and there was no fact that C had expressed the intention of support to E in addition to the expression of the intention of support to E.

As a result, the Defendants conspired in collusion for the purpose of causing E to be elected to the 7th local election D market.

arrow