logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원 2015.01.22 2014노489
공직선거법위반
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The punishment of the lower court (including KRW 900,000) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In the sentencing guidelines, the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines does not present a separate method of dealing with the ordinary concurrent crimes, and in the case of the ordinary concurrent crimes, it is difficult to conclude that the higher of the recommended range of individual crimes is applied.

However, in order to refer to the determination of whether the sentence of the court below is appropriate, the sentencing criteria for serious crimes are indicated according to the examples of punishment of ordinary concurrent crimes.

[Determination of Punishment] Violation of the Election Campaign Period for Election Campaign and Unlawful Election Campaign [Violation of Method of Election Campaign] - Where a crime is committed by using social status or influence, for unspecified persons or many other parties [the scope of recommending punishment] Where a crime is committed by using social status or influence, the portion of the printed matter in this case that “the E Si Council members urgently supported five million won” is limited to two acts among the main sentence of the 31st election, and the contents of the 31st election, the defendant has no record of criminal punishment, and the defendant repents his mistake and reflects depth.

However, even though the Defendant did not actually receive KRW 5 million from E as library facility costs, the Defendant posted printed materials stating the details of promotion of E’s achievements on the front bulletin board of 1,233 apartment units, and distributed the said printed materials to female members at the establishment meeting of the 1,233 apartment units. In light of the fact that the Defendant used the status to exercise considerable influence on the occupants of the apartment as the chairperson of the council of occupants’ representatives, the size and degree of the offense, and the impact on the election, etc., the instant crime does not constitute a crime.

arrow