beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
Reasons
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles) is to interpret Article 112(1) of the former Act on the Election of Public Officials (amended by Act No. 11374, Feb. 29, 2012; amended by Act No. 14073, Mar. 3, 2016; hereinafter the same) to mean “an area in which the Defendant wishes to take out from a specific election in the future” from his/her position as of the time of contribution means “an area in which the Defendant wishes to take out from a specific election in the future” as of the time of contribution, and it conforms with the purport of the Public Official Election Act to leave a certain election which will be held in the future.
Nevertheless, the lower court held that the Defendant’s act does not constitute a third party’s act on the ground that the “election district concerned” as provided in Article 112(1) of the former Public Official Election Act refers to the election district as provided in the Table 1 attached to Article 25(2) of the same Act, and the election district table in the National Assembly area became invalid as of January 1, 2016 in accordance with the Constitutional Court’s decision on the inconsistency with the Constitution, and the National Assembly’s amendment of the Public Official Election Act as Act No. 14073 on March 3, 2016 as of March 3, 2016, became final and conclusive in the election district table in the National Assembly area of the National Assembly. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment of a contribution act.
2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.
A. The prosecutor changed the indictment to the indictment of this case for the following reasons: “23 residents in the constituency, such as H, who are the citizens of the relevant constituency, and 24 persons, including K, who have a relationship with the electoral residents, attending the ceremony of opening the election campaign office of F” in the indictment of this case: (a) the summary of the crime and evidence, as stated in the column of “the summary of the crime and evidence” and the part of the acquittal as stated in 1-A (75-9). The court below found the Defendant not guilty.