The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B’s dismisunderstanding of fact (not guilty part)’s dissolution of Defendant A’s lawsuit and bringing about about about about about 100 the highest term of the lawsuit cannot be deemed as the consideration for labor. Since the payment for labor was made with excessive property, it constitutes a contribution act as provided by the Act on Entrusted Election by Public Organizations, Etc. (hereinafter “Entrusted Election Act”).

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court against the Defendants (a fine of two million won per fine) is too uneased and unfair.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. Of the facts charged in the instant case, determination on the assertion of mistake as to the violation of the Act on Entrusted Elections by Public Organizations, etc. 1) The summary of the facts charged in this part is as follows: Defendant A was run for the election of the president of the L Livestock Industry Cooperatives (hereinafter “L Livestock Industry Cooperatives”) that was implemented on March 11, 2015, and Defendant B is a member of the L Livestock Industry Cooperatives’s interest.

(a) A candidate for an election for the head of an agricultural cooperative under the Agricultural Cooperative Act shall not make a contribution to members during the period subject to restriction on contributions;

Nevertheless, Defendant A, at the time, at the time, at the place of the ruling, closed the litigation raised by Defendant A, and the Defendant B called “the person who takes charge of divided part of the dead litigation,” and provided Defendant B with an act of contribution by providing Defendant B with approximately KRW 150,000 of the market price, which is equivalent to KRW 150,000.

(b) No person shall receive contributions from a candidate for an election for the head of an agricultural cooperative under the Agricultural Cooperative Act or approve the expression of intention of contributions during the period subject to restriction on contributions;

Nevertheless, Defendant B, at the time, at the time, at the place of the ruling, received the proposal from Defendant A to “drawing part of a dead lawsuit,” and dismantled the lawsuit owned by Defendant A, and then received a donation from the candidate for the election of the president of the cooperative by being provided with approximately KRW 150,00 of the market price, which is approximately KRW 10,000,000.

2) The lower court’s judgment is based on the records.