On November 27, 2016, the Defendant did not cease to procure operating expenses and project costs from C, a contractor, in relation to the redevelopment and improvement project of B housing, and in relation to the above project, there was no employee from the beginning who resides in the project site separately from the beginning, and there was no employee from the time of entering the project site, and there was no employee from the union or any executive officer of the union due to the failure to pay wages to union executives, and by phone call to D, “the operating expenses and project costs entered from C as the ex officio cancellation of the B housing redevelopment and improvement project is certain, and C employees leave, and since there was no monthly wage, the executive officers of the union were different.

“ .........”

In the end, by spreading the above false facts, the Defendant interfered with the redevelopment and improvement project of the B Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Association by abandoning the voting related to the opinion of ex officio cancellation or by causing concerns over voting with the approval of ex officio cancellation.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of partially the accused by the prosecution;

1. A copy of a transcript or a copy of a passbook of bank in the name of the B association;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (person H telephone communications);

1. Relevant Article 314 of the Criminal Act and Articles 314 (1) and 313 of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment for a crime;

1. 50,000 won of a fine for which the sentence is suspended; and

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act (one hundred thousand won per day converted);

1. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Da1448, Apr. 2, 2011)

1. As to the assertion that there was no awareness of falsity, the defendant and his defense counsel stated the defendant.