Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 800,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a representative of the Livestock Industry Cooperatives.

No person shall make contributions for a candidate with respect to the relevant entrusted election during the period subject to restriction on contributions.

Nevertheless, at around 18:30 on November 22, 2014, the Defendant provided eight members (F, G, H, I, J, K, L, and M) of the said association with food and drink equivalent to KRW 280,000, for the purpose of introducing E as a candidate at the time when he planned to leave the election for the head of the said livestock cooperative, which was scheduled to take place on March 11, 2015.

Accordingly, the defendant made a contribution to the election for the candidate during the contribution-restricted period.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to N, K, E, H, F,O, I, G, and J;

1. Inquiries about the details of currency;

1. Whether to join a credit card receipt, B livestock cooperative member, and the application of the electoral register statutes;

1. Articles 59 and 35 (2) of the Act on Elections Entrusted by relevant legal entities, public organizations, etc. for criminal facts;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for imposing the provisional payment order under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is that a contribution act during the period of restriction on the reason for imposing the punishment constitutes an offense that undermines the objectivity and fairness of the election through the provision of economic benefits, and thus the nature and circumstances of such offense are not easy.

Moreover, the election of the president of a regional association to which the Act on Elections by Public Organizations, etc. applies, needs to be more strict than the election crime due to the closure of the relevant election district, the possibility of confluence with the elector, restrictions on the elector, etc.

On the other hand, it is reasonable to take into account the fact that the defendant recognized the facts of the crime, there is no record of punishment more severe than that of the same criminal record or fine, and that the defendant's act does not seem to have actually influenced the election of the president of the BFF.

This is the same.