A. On August 14, 2012, the lower court stated that: (a) the witness I stated that there was no key to the council of occupants’ representatives; (b) there was no key to the council of occupants’ representatives; and (c) the I stated that there was no locking work of the council of occupants’ representatives after the occurrence of the instant case; (d) the I did not know whether the council of occupants’ representatives was locked again after the occurrence of the instant case; (c) the conference room as indicated in the facts charged was used for the council of occupants’ representatives; (d) the management office and the council of occupants’ representatives kept and managed only one key of the said council room; and (e) the CCTV taken up by the Defendant B and the CCTV taken up by the Defendant B from the court of the lower court on August 14, 2012, it constitutes a crime of opening the council of occupants’ representatives.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted Defendant B is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Unreasonable sentencing (as to Defendant A), the sentence (as to a fine of KRW 700,000) imposed by the lower court on Defendant A is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, Defendant B of the facts charged: (a) on August 14, 2012, around 18:30, the council of occupants’ representatives on the first floor underground of the E management office at Yangju-si (hereinafter “instant council of occupants’ representatives”).

(2) In light of the following circumstances, the lower court held that Defendant B was the key from Defendant B’s staff member of the management office and infringed the correction device of the above conference room without permission after using the key kept for emergency purposes at the management office. (2) In light of the following circumstances, the lower court held a door and held a door as the key from Defendant B’s staff member.