In addition, the instant short circuit measure is conducted without the resolution of the Representative Committee, and does not constitute a legitimate exercise of authority.

However, since the court below acquitted the defendant on the grounds that there is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant either taken or instructed the exclusive measure, the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the principle of free evaluation of evidence, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone, which the Defendant directly taken measures as indicated in the facts charged, or ordered the Defendant to take the above measures.

It is difficult to see, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

A. Article 40(1) of the E Management Regulations provides that the N Cooperatives shall be appointed as the first manager. Article 50(2) of the Regulations provides that the management officer may take measures, such as power failure or fractional suspension, if the management officer fails to pay management expenses for at least three months.

The Act stipulates.

B. Article 10(1) of the E Management System Regulations provides that a custodian may impose a penalty on an occupant who fails to perform his/her duty or violates his/her duty, and the custodian may, by a resolution of the Representative Committee, take any discretionary action, such as a short circuit, a short circuit, a closed door, a closed door, a ban on carrying out goods, or restrictions on parking until the performance of the duty or the violation is corrected.

The Act stipulates.

In addition, Article 28 of the above provision does not violate the above provision or implement the instructions of the receiver.