주택법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The summary of the facts charged is the chairman of the committee for the representatives of occupants of the first apartment complex in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-si.
Where occupants, users or management entities of multi-family housing intend to destroy or damage multi-family housing or fully or partially remove the relevant facilities, they shall obtain permission from the head of a Si/Gun/Gu or file a report with the consent of at least 2/3 of all occupants, as prescribed by Presidential Decree.
On March 24, 2014, the Defendant removed the bearing wall between “studio 5 in the club” and “studio 6 in the club,” without obtaining the consent of the occupant from the 117-dong underground floor of the above apartment complex 1,17-dong, and without obtaining the consent of the occupant.
2. Determination
A. Although the Defendant, at the time of the alteration of the Defendant’s lawsuit, was holding the office of president of the representative meeting of occupants of the apartment complex of this case, the Defendant did not instruct the removal of the non-proof bearing wall as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, nor did
B. The removal of the non-proof bearing wall stated in the facts charged of the instant case was conducted by the defective repair business entity. In order to be found guilty of the facts charged of the instant case, the Defendant should have instructed or involved in the removal of the non-proof bearing wall of this case to the defective repair business entity.
At the time, the defendant is in charge of the president of the representative meeting of occupants of the apartment of this case, so there is doubt as to whether the defendant or the defendant ordered the representative meeting of occupants who are the representative of the apartment of this case to the defective repair business entity and not the non-proof bearing wall of this case has been removed.
However, in this case, there is no direct evidence to acknowledge that the defendant or the representative meeting of occupants ordered the defective repair company to remove the non-proof wall of this case (D in charge of the on-site general manager of the company that performed the defective repair work at the time was present as a witness and the occupant requested the removal of the non-proof wall and the removal work was conducted by the defendant or the representative meeting of occupants.