All appeals filed by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants A (A) did not have any intention to mistake facts or misapprehension of legal principles with respect to the excessive disbursement of election expenses, and did not conspired with Defendant B.

B) The sentence of the lower court on the sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (fine 800,000) is too unreasonable and unfair.2) Defendant B’s sentence of the lower court (fine 800,000) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. Based on the evidence duly admitted, the lower court determined that Defendant A paid 8,85,00 won to the election campaign workers who were employed by the preliminary candidate, without specifically calculating the election expenses incurred by the Defendants, based on the fact that: (a) even if based on the report on revenues and expenditures of political funds submitted by the Defendants to the election commission on June 23, 2014, the election expenses spent by Defendant A were merely 645,831 won; and (b) the Defendants paid 1/200 or more of the restricted amount of election expenses to the election campaign workers, etc.; and (c) Defendant A paid 8,85,000 won to the election campaign workers who were employed for the last election campaign after receiving a proposal from Defendant B as allowances for election campaign workers; and (d) Defendant A knew that the election expenses spent by the preliminary candidate include the restricted amount of election expenses included in the election expenses; and (d) Defendant A knew or conspired with B, as alleged in the ground for appeal by the lower court, the lower court’s determination is justified and acceptable.