The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The term "election district" as provided in Article 112 (1) of the Public Official Election Act means a election district of " future election" rather than a "age election" at the time of contribution, in light of the legislative purpose of the Public Official Election Act, which prohibits contribution acts.

Therefore, even if the list of electoral districts in the National Assembly area becomes invalid from January 1, 2016 due to the decision of the Constitutional Court (the Constitutional Court Decision 2012Hun-Ma 190, Oct. 30, 2014) and the legislative omission by the National Assembly, the Defendant’s delivery of one million won check to E on February 19, 2016 constitutes a third party’s contribution act.

Nevertheless, the court below held that the defendant's act committed during the period in which the list of its zones becomes invalid cannot be deemed to constitute a third party's act of contribution, on the premise that the "election district concerned" as provided in Article 112 (1) of the Public Official Election Act means each election district established by the table of its constituency. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Article 112(1) of the former Public Official Election Act (amended by Act No. 14073, Mar. 3, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply) defines “contribution act” as “an act of offering money, goods, or other property benefits, or an act of expressing an intention to offer, or promising to offer such things, to a person in the constituency or a person having a relation with him/her, or an institution, organization, or facilities outside the district, even if there is an event or event of the relevant election district,” and then restricts a person to make an act of donation (Article 113), a political party, or a family member of the candidate (Article 114), or a person who makes an act of donation in violation of this provision (Article 257(1)).”