All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the Supreme Court held that the solicitation of participation in voting, including the contents that support, recommend, or oppose a specific political party or candidate, is lawful even during the election campaign period (Supreme Court Decision 2017Do6050 Decided December 22, 2017). According to this, solicitation of participation in voting, which indirectly appeals for support of K candidates, is lawful.

In light of the structure content, etc. of the instant route, only the transmission of the route and the transmission was sufficiently recognizable from the elector’s point of view as an indirect appeal for support for the candidate.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Considering the fact that the content of transmission is different from the commitment of the K candidate at the time I, and that the transmission was made for the purpose of dissolution of the military, the defendant did not have the intention to violate the Public Official Election Act, and the defendant's act does not violate the social rules.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (an amount of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) In the event of a misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, expenses are incurred in the event planned by the Defendant, and the costs incurred shall be borne by the arbitr. The lower court, without considering these points, cannot trust U’s statement that corresponds to the facts charged.

We rejected.

U has already been aware that the responsibility of the election law may arise in the event of lending facilities without compensation as a person who has experience in several events related to election and has already been able to know that the responsibility of the election law may arise in the event of lending facilities without compensation, so that the defendant may not claim the actual cost, but if the problem of the cost arises, it is the intention of the party to bear the burden of the defendant

The Defendant is guilty of violating the Political Fund Act among the facts charged in the instant case, but not guilty of this part of the facts charged.