logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.11.20 2018노226
공공단체등위탁선거에관한법률위반
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to the violation of the Act on Entrusted Elections, such as a misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant was aware that a heavy sentence will be imposed, and the lower court acknowledged this part of the facts charged, but did not encourage B, C, D, and E to provide money to other electors.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of all the facts charged and erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment, one year of suspended sentence, one year of community service work, 120 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant, at the lower court, led to the confession of the facts charged against the Defendant, and denied part of the crime to the effect that he did not encourage other voters to provide money in the first instance.

However, in light of the following circumstances, the confessions made by the defendant at the original instance court may be deemed as having been made during the presence of a defense counsel before the judge who has guaranteed objectivity and fairness in accordance with the statutes, and there is no special reason to suspect the credibility of the confessions at the original instance court, and there is no evidence to suspect the credibility thereof in the original instance court. In light of the following circumstances, the confessions at the original instance court and the appellate court may be deemed as having been duly adopted and investigated

In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below and the court below as well as the Defendant’s statement of confession at the court below, the court below’s judgment that found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged is just.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

① The Defendant denied a crime in the course of investigation, and subsequently indicted for detention, and led to confession at the lower court.

The defendant has made a confession at the original instance (the first time).

arrow