logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2013.09.12 2013도6818
공직선거법위반
Text

All appeals are dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the evidence duly admitted by the court below as to Defendant A’s grounds of appeal in light of the relevant legal principles, we affirm the court below’s finding Defendant A guilty of contribution act and advance election campaign among the facts charged in the instant case for reasons as stated in its holding.

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there is no error of law by misunderstanding facts in violation of logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the legal principles on prior election campaigns and third party contributions under the Public Official Election Act.

Meanwhile, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing may only be filed in cases where the court below rendered a sentence of death or imprisonment with or without prison labor for an indefinite term or for not less than ten years. Thus, an appeal to the Supreme Court is not allowed on the grounds that the above defendant’s sentencing was unfair.

2. Examining the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor on the defendant A in light of the records, we affirm the judgment of the court of first instance which acquitted the defendant A on the ground that the public contest relationship was not proven with regard to the purchase of the defendant A and the inducement for understanding.

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there is no error of law by misunderstanding facts in violation of logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the legal principles on public offering relations.

3. Examining the prosecutor’s grounds of appeal as to Defendant B in light of the relevant legal principles, we affirm the judgment of the court of first instance that acquitted Defendant B on the grounds that there was no proof of crime regarding the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, facts against logical and empirical rules are recognized as erroneous or under the Public Official Election Act.

arrow