도시및주거환경정비법위반
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
1. On December 29, 2014, the Defendant is a person who was elected as the president of the partnership at the general meeting of the redevelopment and rearrangement project association for housing located in the zone of D on December 29, 2014, and performs
In addition to the matters prescribed in the budget, the Housing Reconstruction Association shall undergo a resolution of a general meeting comprised of its members on contracts to be borne by its members.
Nevertheless, on February 27, 2015, the Defendant entered into an industrial agreement with the board of representatives at will, without the resolution of the general meeting, to pay approximately KRW 1.5 billion, in excess of KRW 3 billion, which is delegated to the board of directors and representative council for the payment of the expenses for the settlement of accounts at will, by the resolution of the board of representatives, in the office room of the above association located in Bupyeong-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu E.
2. The evidence submitted by the Defendant reveals that ① two mountain construction companies (hereinafter “two mountain construction”) and the Defendant worked as the president of the partnership.
After the completion of a housing redevelopment project implemented by the two mountain construction projects, the association of this case was unable to reach an agreement with respect to the mountain funds that the association of this case should pay for the two mountain construction after the completion of a housing redevelopment project implemented by the two mountain construction projects. ② The association of this case decided to delegate the matters concerning the settlement agreement with two mountain construction sections to the directors of the association of this case and the board of representatives through a general meeting of shareholders on December 29, 2014. ③ The two mountain construction proposed that the association of this case pay the settlement amount of KRW 3 billion less than the fixed amount demanded to pay the association of this case around February 2015. ④ The defendant received the aforementioned proposal from the two mountain construction and received the proposal from the two mountain construction committee and the board of representatives of the association of this case, and received the agreement with the private law firm of this case on the construction expenses of the two mountain construction sections.