The sentence against the accused shall be 500,000 won.

The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

(1) The Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) is applicable to the scope of “matters stipulated in the budget” of the redevelopment association of this case.

(2) Article 24(3)5 of the Act does not correspond to “a contract that imposes a burden on union members, other than the matters stipulated in the budget,” and Article 24(3)5 of the Act does not constitute “a contract that imposes a burden on union members,” and Article 24(3)5 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions and Article 24(3)5 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for the Defendant

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, etc., the purport of Article 24(3)5 of the Act on the Maintenance of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions as the resolution of the general meeting is to ensure that the opinion of the association members is reflected in matters that directly affect the rights and obligations of the association members, and that the penal provisions under Article 85 subparag. 5 of the same Act are provided in order to accomplish that purpose. In light of the fact that it is difficult to restore to the original state if a contract was concluded and implemented without prior resolution of the general meeting, as well as confusion in legal relations, and that such situation may interfere with the free decision-making of the association members, “resolution of the general meeting” under Article 85 subparag. 5 of the same Act refers to a prior resolution in principle.

Therefore, if an executive officer of a union entered into a contract to become a partner without a prior resolution of a general meeting, it constitutes a tension crime under Article 85 subparagraph 5 of the same Act, and then ratification is made at the general meeting.