Open Decision Ledger · Criminal law
Campaigning outside the period reaches acts whose recipient is not a voter
Supreme Court, Dec. 11, 2025, 2025Do9637 (judgment)
Case name: 중소기업협동조합법위반
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Does Article 53(1) of the Small and Medium Enterprise Cooperative Act, applied to the Small and Medium Enterprise Central Association by Article 125 and punished under Article 137(2), ban campaigning outside the period from the day after the candidate registration deadline to the day before the election even where the person given money, goods or hospitality is not a voter?
Holding
Yes. Election activity is any active and planned act necessary and advantageous for a particular candidate's election or defeat, from which that purpose can be objectively recognised; whether an act is election activity is decided by looking not only at its name but at its whole pattern, including the time, place and manner of the act, objectively from the standpoint of an ordinary person, especially a voter. Article 53(1) bans campaigning outside the period comprehensively and, unlike Article 53(2)(i), does not limit the person to whom the act is directed, so the act is not election activity only where that person is a voter. Where an act of providing money, goods or hospitality is campaigning outside the campaign period from the day after the candidate registration deadline to the day before the election day, it may therefore be punished under Article 137(2) read with Article 53(1) even though it cannot be punished under Article 137(1)(ii) read with Article 53(2)(i).
Summary of the holding, verbatim
중소기업협동조합법 제53조 제1항은 선거운동 기간 외의 선거운동을 전면적·포괄적으로 금지하는 규정으로서, 같은 조 제2항 제1호의 ‘선거인에게 금전·물품·향응 등을 제공하는 등의 행위’와 달리 그 행위의 상대방이 제한되어 있지 않으므로, 선거운동의 상대방이 선거인인 때에만 선거운동에 해당한다고 볼 것은 아니다.
Unofficial English translation
Article 53(1) of the Small and Medium Enterprise Cooperatives Act is a provision that prohibits electioneering outside the electioneering period in a complete and comprehensive manner and, unlike the "act of providing money, goods, entertainment, etc. to a voter" under paragraph (2), subparagraph 1 of the same Article, does not limit the recipient of the act; therefore, it cannot be regarded as constituting electioneering only where the recipient of the electioneering is a voter.
Disposition
Dismissed Stated in the decision
상고를 모두 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
All appeals are dismissed.
Form of the test
Circumstances weighed Stated in the decision
구체적으로 어떠한 행위가 선거운동에 해당하는지를 판단할 때에는 단순히 행위의 명목뿐만 아니라 행위의 양태, 즉 행위가 행하여지는 시기·장소·방법 등을 종합적으로 관찰하여 그것이 특정 후보자의 당선 또는 낙선을 도모하는 목적의지를 수반하는 행위인지를 일반인, 특히 선거인의 관점에서 객관적으로 판단하여야 한다.
Unofficial English translation
In determining specifically what conduct corresponds to electioneering, one must not simply look to the nominal designation of the conduct, but must comprehensively observe the manner of the conduct, that is, the time, place, method, etc. at which the conduct is carried out, and must objectively determine, from the standpoint of the general public, in particular voters, whether it is conduct accompanied by an intention to seek the election or defeat of a specific candidate.
Factors
- 당선 또는 낙선을 도모한다는 목적의사가 객관적으로 인정될 수 있는 능동적·계획적인 행위를 말한다.
- 행위가 행하여지는 시기·장소·방법 등을 종합적으로 관찰하여
- 일반인, 특히 선거인의 관점에서 객관적으로 판단하여야 한다.
- 선거운동의 상대방이 선거인인 때에만 선거운동에 해당한다고 볼 것은 아니다.
- 금전·물품·향응 등 제공 행위의 상대방이 ‘선거인’에 해당하지 않아
Unofficial English translation
• refers to active and planned conduct in which an intention to seek election or defeat can objectively be recognized,
• by comprehensively observing the time, place, method, etc. at which the conduct is carried out,
• must be objectively determined from the standpoint of the general public, in particular voters.
• it cannot be regarded as constituting electioneering only where the recipient of the electioneering is a voter.
• the recipient of the act of providing money, goods, entertainment, etc. does not correspond to a "voter",
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2016. 8. 26. 선고 2015도11812 전원합의체 판결(공2016하, 1457), 대법원 2017. 3. 22. 선고 2016도16314 판결(공2017상, 908)
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court en banc Judgment 2015Do11812 decided August 26, 2016 (Gong 2016 Ha, 1457), Supreme Court Decision 2016Do16314 decided March 22, 2017 (Gong 2017 Sang, 908)
Decisions referred to
[1] 헌법재판소 2021. 7. 15. 선고 2020헌가9 전원재판부 결정(헌공298, 899) / [2] 대법원 2016. 8. 26. 선고 2015도11812 전원합의체 판결(공2016하, 1457), 대법원 2017. 3. 22. 선고 2016도16314 판결(공2017상, 908)
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
How far before the campaign period must conduct occur, and what accompanying circumstances are needed, before a purpose to secure a candidate's election can be objectively recognised?
A later decision that requires some temporal proximity between the act and the election for the purpose to be recognised would narrow this reading, as would a Constitutional Court decision on Article 53 or an amendment to Article 53 or Article 137 of the Small and Medium Enterprise Cooperative Act. Evidence that the meal payment was not accompanied by any appeal for support would also call for the entry to be read again.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
6 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-24
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on 6 of the 8 axes; the readings differed on axis 4 (form of the test), axis 8 (open question and revisit condition).
Axis 4 (Form of the test): Primary “Circumstances weighed” vs Independent “Elements stated”
The primary reading emphasizes a comprehensive assessment of time, place, and manner, while the independent reading sets out the elements that define campaigning, so the framing of the standard differs.
선거운동의 상대방이 선거인인 때에만 선거운동에 해당한다고 볼 것은 아니다.Axis 8 (Open question and revisit condition): Primary “How far before the campaign period must conduct occur, and what accompanying circumstances are needed, before a purpose to secure a candidate's election can be objectively recognised?” vs Independent “What factual circumstances distinguish ordinary social hospitality toward non-electors from active, planned election campaigning?”
The primary reading asks how far before the campaign period conduct may occur and what further circumstances are needed, while the independent reading asks how to separate ordinary social hospitality from campaigning, so the points differ.
중소기업협동조합법 제53조 제1항은 선거운동 기간 외의 선거운동을 전면적·포괄적으로 금지하는 규정으로서, 같은 조 제2항 제1호의 ‘선거인에게 금전·물품·향응 등을 제공하는 등의 행위’와 달리 그 행위의 상대방이 제한되어 있지 않으므로, 선거운동의 상대방이 선거인인 때에만 선거운동에 해당한다고 볼 것은 아니다.Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The Seoul Southern District Court, sitting on appeal, in its judgment of 5 June 2025 (2023No1899), left the first-instance judgment standing in both directions. It held that Defendant 2's payment of the meal bill at the gathering of 2 November 2018, made alongside speeches by Defendants 1 and 2 asking for support for Defendant 1 about four months before the election of the chairman of the Small and Medium Enterprise Central Association, was pre-election campaigning prohibited by Article 53(1), and that even though the recipients were not voters so that Article 53(2)(i) did not apply, the act was punishable under Article 53(1), with a common intent between Defendants 1 and 2. The acquittals of Defendants 1 and 3, apart from the guilty part against Defendant 1, were also left standing for want of proof.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court found no error. Reading the appellate reasons against the relevant law and the lawfully admitted evidence, it held that the court below had not exceeded the limits of free evaluation in breach of the rules of logic and experience, and had not misapprehended the law on the offence of violating the Small and Medium Enterprise Cooperative Act, on the meaning of election activity under Article 53(1), on the relation between Article 53(1) and Article 53(2)(i), or on conspiracy. It added that the prosecution, having appealed the whole judgment as to Defendants 1 and 3, had set out no concrete ground of complaint for the guilty part against Defendant 1. All appeals were dismissed by the unanimous opinion of the Justices.
Distinguishing conditions
- An act from which a purpose to secure or defeat a particular candidate's election cannot be objectively recognised, since the definition requires that purpose to be objectively apparent.
- An act falling within the campaign period from the day after the candidate registration deadline to the day before the election day, since the ban at issue reaches only campaigning outside that period.
- An act whose recipient is a voter and which consists of providing money, goods or hospitality, charged as an offence under Article 137(1)(ii) read with Article 53(2)(i) rather than under the ban on campaigning outside the period.
Record verification notes
Set the meal payment against the gathering of 2 November 2018, the speeches of support for Defendant 1 given there, and the election about four months later, since the purpose finding rests on those circumstances taken together. Then check which provision the indictment invokes, because Article 53(1) has no counterpart limited to voters while Article 53(2)(i) does. Finally confirm that each appellant set out a concrete ground of complaint, as the prosecution did not for the guilty part against Defendant 1.
From the official text
Points at issue
[1] 중소기업협동조합법 제137조 제2항, 제125조에서 준용하는 제53조 제1항이 선거운동이 가능한 기간을 제한하고 그 기간 외의 선거운동을 금지·처벌하는 입법 취지 [2] 중소기업협동조합법 제53조 제1항에서 정한 ‘선거운동’의 의미 및 이에 해당하는지 판단하는 방법 / 중소기업협동조합법 제53조 제1항은 선거운동 기간 외의 선거운동을 전면적·포괄적으로 금지하는 규정인지 여부(적극) 및 선거운동의 상대방이 선거인인 때에만 선거운동에 해당하는지 여부(소극) [3] 금전·물품·향응 등 제공 행위의 상대방이 ‘선거인’에 해당하지 않으나, 그 행위가 ‘후보자등록마감일의 다음 날부터 선거일 전일까지의 선거운동 기간 외의 선거운동’에 해당하는 경우 중소기업협동조합법 제137조 제2항, 제125조에서 준용하는 제53조 제1항 위반죄로 처벌할 수 있는지 여부(적극)
Unofficial English translation
[1] The legislative intent of Article 137(2) and Article 53(1) of the Small and Medium Enterprise Cooperatives Act, applied mutatis mutandis under Article 125 thereof, in restricting the period during which electioneering is permitted and prohibiting and punishing electioneering outside that period [2] The meaning of "electioneering" prescribed in Article 53(1) of the Small and Medium Enterprise Cooperatives Act and the method of determining whether conduct falls within it / Whether Article 53(1) of the Small and Medium Enterprise Cooperatives Act is a provision that prohibits electioneering outside the electioneering period in a complete and comprehensive manner (affirmative) and whether conduct constitutes electioneering only where the recipient of the electioneering is a voter (negative) [3] Where the recipient of an act of providing money, goods, entertainment, etc. does not correspond to a "voter," but the act corresponds to "electioneering outside the electioneering period from the day following the candidate registration deadline to the day before the election day," whether the person may be punished for the crime of violating Article 137(2) and Article 53(1) of the Small and Medium Enterprise Cooperatives Act, applied mutatis mutandis under Article 125 thereof (affirmative)
Summary of the holding
[1] 중소기업협동조합법 제137조 제2항, 제125조에서 준용하는 제53조 제1항이 선거운동이 가능한 기간을 제한하고 그 기간 외의 선거운동을 금지·처벌하는 것은 선거운동 기간의 제한 없이 선거운동을 무한정 허용할 경우에는 후보자 간의 지나친 경쟁과 과열로 선거의 공정성을 해할 위험이 있고, 선거운동 기간이 장기화되면 후보자 상호 간은 물론 선거인들 상호 간에 반목이 깊어질 우려가 있으며, 특히 이는 중소기업중앙회와 같이 회원 수가 소규모인 집단 내에서 심각한 선거 후유증을 초래할 위험이 있어 이를 방지하기 위한 것이다. [2] 중소기업협동조합법 제53조 제1항에서 정한 ‘선거운동’이란 특정 선거에서 특정 후보자의 당선 또는 낙선을 위하여 필요하고도 유리한 모든 행위로서 당선 또는 낙선을 도모한다는 목적의사가 객관적으로 인정될 수 있는 능동적·계획적인 행위를 말한다. 구체적으로 어떠한 행위가 선거운동에 해당하는지를 판단할 때에는 단순히 행위의 명목뿐만 아니라 행위의 양태, 즉 행위가 행하여지는 시기·장소·방법 등을 종합적으로 관찰하여 그것이 특정 후보자의 당선 또는 낙선을 도모하는 목적의지를 수반하는 행위인지를 일반인, 특히 선거인의 관점에서 객관적으로 판단하여야 한다. 중소기업협동조합법 제53조 제1항은 선거운동 기간 외의 선거운동을 전면적·포괄적으로 금지하는 규정으로서, 같은 조 제2항 제1호의 ‘선거인에게 금전·물품·향응 등을 제공하는 등의 행위’와 달리 그 행위의 상대방이 제한되어 있지 않으므로, 선거운동의 상대방이 선거인인 때에만 선거운동에 해당한다고 볼 것은 아니다. [3] 중소기업협동조합법 제53조의 규정 체계, 입법 취지와 목적, 문언 및 내용 등을 종합하여 살펴보면, 금전·물품·향응 등 제공 행위의 상대방이 ‘선거인’에 해당하지 않아 그 행위를 중소기업협동조합법 제137조 제1항 제2호, 제125조에서 준용하는 제53조 제2항 제1호 위반죄로 처벌할 수 없다고 하더라도, 그 행위가 ‘후보자등록마감일의 다음 날부터 선거일 전일까지의 선거운동 기간 외의 선거운동’에 해당한다면 같은 법 제137조 제2항, 제125조에서 준용하는 제53조 제1항 위반죄로 처벌할 수 있다고 보아야 한다.
Order
상고를 모두 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
All appeals are dismissed.
Provisions referred to
[1] 중소기업협동조합법 제53조 제1항, 제125조, 제137조 제2항 / [2] 중소기업협동조합법 제53조 제1항, 제2항 제1호 / [3] 중소기업협동조합법 제53조, 제125조, 제137조 제1항 제2호, 제2항
Read 2026-10-24 · Cross-read 2026-10-24. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger