(a) Reasons for appeal by the defendant;

The summary of the grounds for appeal by the defendant's defense counsel is as follows: the defendant brought a lawsuit against the non-indicted 1 for the confirmation of the status of the elected person; the non-indicted 1 brought a counterclaim against the defendant in the above lawsuit for the confirmation of the status of the elected person; the suspension of performance of duties; and the prohibition of interference with duties; the court rendered a judgment that the defendant was the elected person; and the judgment became final and conclusive; therefore, the defendant, as the chief director of the association having legitimate power of representation, committed the act listed in subparagraph 2-D and (e) of the facts charged; thus, the defendant cannot be established as a principal of the association; even if the defendant did not have authority as the chief director before the judgment became final and conclusive; even if the defendant did not have the authority of the chief director before the judgment became final and conclusive, the defendant, who was the first-class non-indicted 1 and the first-party 1,700 votes in the election of the chief director, was not guilty of the facts charged, or of misapprehending the legal principles that found the defendant guilty.

(b) Prosecutor's appeal;

First, in light of the relationship between the victim non-indicted 1, non-indicted 2, and non-indicted 3's statement and the defendant, who led the crime on July 2, 2002, and the chief of the election headquarters, who was appointed to the chief of the gas charging office, and the defendant, on the part of the president on July 2, 2002, even if the defendant did not share the act at the site, the court below found the defendant not guilty of each of the charges on the basis of the victim non-indicted 1's statement that the defendant did not at the site, was erroneous in the misapprehension of facts or in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. Second, even though the defendant did not win in the civil procedure, the procedural legitimacy of the judgment of the court on the legality of the election was externally justified in order to accomplish his claim, and the defendant was committed in the crime in this case, and the defendant did not violate the wrong acts such as the denial of the facts from the investigative agency, etc., it is unreasonable to suspend the sentence of a fine of KRW 3 million.

2. Determination

A. On the grounds for appeal by the defendant

In full view of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, (title omitted) conducted the election from May 15, 202 to the 27th day of the same month to elect the 11 president of the cooperative. The election commission notified the Defendant of the cancellation of the election management regulations on May 26, 202, but the election counting was conducted as of the 5th day following the last entry of the election, and the 3,737th day was acquired respectively, on the ground that the Defendant had no effect on the appointment of the 10th president and the 2nd election management of the 1st president, and that the 2nd election management of the 2nd election was decided upon the 1st election of the 1st president and the 2nd election of the 1st president on the grounds that the 2nd election was invalid. However, the 1st election management of the 2nd election of the 1st president and the 2nd election of the 1st president on the grounds that the 2nd election president had no effect on the 2nd election.

In addition, although the defendant puts the largest vote in the above election, even though he was ordered to suspend the effect of the decision of non-party 1 as the elected person in the application for the suspension of the effect of notification of the elected person, which the defendant voluntarily raised, by the court, until the principal of the lawsuit demanding the confirmation of the election is finalized, in light of the fact that he held a provisional general meeting of representatives of cooperatives and presented the agenda of "the confirmation of the election of the chief director" without any provision of the articles of association, the defendant cannot be deemed to have raised doubt as to the existence of his authority as the chief director, and therefore there is no reason to believe that the defendant's mistake of facts was not a criminal intent

B. As to the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor

(1) Fact-finding or misunderstanding of legal principles

It is recognized that ten persons, including Nonindicted 5, enter the office of the president on July 2, 2002 at the same time, who support and scam for the defendant, and went out of the office of the president. Furthermore, as to whether the defendant conspireds with, or cooperates with, the above crime, health stand, Nonindicted 1’s testimony at the original court and the original court of the trial (the statement that Nonindicted 5, etc., was known to the chief director’s office to prepare for the appearance of office on July 2, 2002), the witness Nonindicted 4 and Nonindicted 5’s testimony at the trial court and the defendant’s original trial statement at the trial (the defendant and his neighbors were posted to the chief director’s office on July 1, 2002) on the same day, and there is no sufficient evidence to acknowledge that there is any error in the misapprehension of legal principles as alleged in the above part of the facts charged, and there is no other evidence to find it guilty as to this part of the facts charged.

(2) The point of unfair sentencing

However, even if the defendant committed the crime of this case, such as arbitrary judgment prior to the judgment of the court of law and exercise of authority as the chief executive officer, it is not good that the defendant committed the crime of this case. However, the defendant was recognized as the representative authority of the 11th chief executive officer. Accordingly, in full view of all the circumstances that form the basis for sentencing as shown in the records such as the situation after the crime, the situation after the crime, the age of the defendant, and the environment, etc., such as conflict between union members and union members occurring in the election process, the conflict between union

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since each appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, all appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Jong-chul (Presiding Judge)