The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal was provided by the staff of the management office of the apartment of this case with the CCTV of this case, which contains the form of sealing the seal on the document on behalf of the chairman of the council of occupants' representatives, without the consent of the victim. In light of all circumstances such as the situation of operation of the council of occupants' representatives at that time, the defendant's act cannot be deemed as an act for the purpose of convening a general assembly meeting or for the purpose of social rules under Article 20 of the Criminal Act, or an act that does not violate social rules, the judgment below which acquitted the defendant of this case on the charge of

2. The phrase “act that does not contravene social norms” under Article 20 of the Criminal Act refers to an act that is acceptable in light of the overall spirit of legal order or the social ethics or social norms surrounding the act. Thus, if a certain act satisfies the requirements such as legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act, reasonableness of the means or method of the act, balance between the protected interest and the infringed interest, urgency, and supplementary nature that there is no other means or method other than the act, it constitutes a justifiable act.

I would like to say.

(See Supreme Court Decision 86Do1764 Decided October 28, 1986, Supreme Court Decision 2004Do8530 Decided February 25, 2005, Supreme Court Decision 2013Do6761 Decided February 16, 201, etc.). The evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court is comprehensively considered as follows: ① The president of the council of occupants’ representatives, who is the chairperson of the council of occupants’ representatives, of the instant case, had the victim, who is his spouse, conduct the affairs of approval without directly affixing the document of approval, such as the disbursement of apartment management expenses, etc.; and the Defendant, who became aware of such fact, clarified the problem of D’s method of approval, etc. as the representative of the instant apartment, and suggested the removal of the representative accordingly.