All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court found the Defendants guilty of this part of the facts charged, although the Defendants did not conduct an election campaign when it was not an election campaign period prior to the election campaign period. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court found the Defendants guilty of this part of the facts charged, although the Defendants’ alleged facts are true and related to the public interest, and the illegality of such facts was eliminated. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the rejection of illegality, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(c)

Each sentence sentenced by the court below which is unfair in sentencing (Defendant A: a fine of 1.5 million won, Defendant B: a fine of 1.5 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the fact that the Defendants engaged in an election campaign without being a candidate or not by having the members sign on the paper attached with the explanation of the content and attached document, for the purpose of preventing the election from being elected in the election of the head of the D association, E, who intends to be a candidate, from February 7, 2015 to November 1, 2015, presents to the union members a petition containing various suspicions that E, when employed as the head of the D association, has committed an occupational corruption, for the purpose of preventing the election from being elected.

Therefore, the above assertion by the Defendants is without merit.

B. In order to eliminate illegality pursuant to the proviso of Article 62 of the Act on Entrusted Elections, such as public organizations, etc. to determine the misapprehension of legal principles, the alleged facts conform to the truth in view of the whole, and in view of its content and nature, the perpetrator is related to the public interest and also has the motive to indicate the facts for the sake of the public interest. However, the public interest is always required.