The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

In full view of the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles), an incorporated association I (hereinafter referred to as “the Union”) sent a public letter requesting support to the office of the National Assembly member, the Defendant received KRW 1 million from T and let the staff of the office transfer KRW 50,000 won at the standard of KRW 1050,000 to the accounts of the Union, the Defendant recognized the deposited person as the Defendant by the federation as the notification of the deposit to the immediately preceding federation, and notified the deposited person to the person with a disability in the Y area as the K Council member after making the deposit. Since it is sufficiently recognized that the Defendant had the intention to see the effect of the provision of money to the K Council member, it is recognized that the Defendant, not T, the subject of the contribution act, is the Defendant, and the relationship with the election of the contribution act.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the facts charged is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles or affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

Judgment

원심이 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 증거들에 의하면, 연합회가 K 국회의원 사무소로 후원을 요청하는 공문을 보낸 사실, T 이 연합회가 아닌 피고인에게 100만 원을 건넸고, 피고인이 5만 원을 보탠 105만 원을 사무소 직원으로 하여금 연합 회 계좌로 송금하게 한 사실, 피고인은 송금 무렵 연합 회 사무처 장인 C에게 연락하여 후원금이 들어갈 예정이라고 말한 사실은 인정된다.

However, in full view of the following circumstances admitted by the above evidence, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is sufficient to prove that the defendant had the intention of having K Council members consider the effect of providing money to T to the Federation.

It is insufficient to view it, and there is no other evidence to prove it.

Therefore, the decision was made to the same effect.