Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

The above fines are imposed by the Defendants.

A. The Defendants’ mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles 1) The Gangnam-gu Office of Gangnam-gu (A) performed the improvement work for the fence of this case owned by Gangnam-gu at their own expense on the offering of a bribe and occupational breach of trust related to the yellow fever. Since the occupants of the apartment of this case have obtained anti-private interest, it is merely that the occupants of the apartment of this case have obtained anti-private interest, and it does not constitute the offering of a bribe because it was collected the intent of the occupants of the apartment of this case to increase one of the audit plaque together with the yellow fever to the officials in charge of

In addition, the decline of the sulfur fever of this case is not delivered in advance on the premise of the resolution of civil petition, but delivered by the marking of the scrap after the civil petition is resolved, so it cannot be viewed as a bribe.

B) Meanwhile, this is the council of the council of the council of occupants' representatives of the apartment of this case held on December 4, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the "council of executives of this case").

(C) As a result of a resolution, the court below convicted the Defendants of the offering of bribe and the offering of occupational breach of trust in relation to the payment of monetary rewards. (2) As to the occupational breach of trust related to the payment of monetary rewards under the apartment management rules, the sales of scrap metal generated in the process of replacing the instant elevator is lawful pursuant to Article 21(2)3 of the apartment management rules, which is possible by the resolution of the board of directors, and it does not cause damage to the apartment residents. (c) Defendant B only participated in the instant meeting as an adviser to the instant board of directors, and there was no legal liability since it was not an officer at the time, nor did there were no voting rights under the management rules.) Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts, or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby finding the Defendants guilty of the charge of offering the bribe and occupational breach of trust.

Therefore, the council of occupants' representatives is resolved.