A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Provided, That the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant, who was a member of the C-building Improvement Project Promotion Committee, has become a member of the C-building Improvement Project Promotion Committee, has repeated conflict of opinion between D and D in each decision-making, which is the chairperson of the C-building Improvement Project Promotion Committee.

On January 24, 2013, the Defendant: (a) had the public service center of the Seongbuk-gu Incheon Metropolitan City Si 1, 6812, the Sungnam Police Station, which was located in Seongbuk-gu 6812, receive criminal punishment; (b) “D, as a person who was in office as the chairperson of the promotion committee of the C-building Improvement Project Association; (c) was disqualified after the resolution of dismissal by the promotion committee convened by 45 members of the promotion committee on December 18, 2012; and (d) was a person who was in office as a member of the E, F, G, H, I, and Jdo promotion committee and was disqualified after the resolution of dismissal; (d) the Defendant refused to transfer duties and interfere with duties despite the duty to transfer duties to the promotion committee acting as an agent; and (d) submitted copies of confusion on December 18, 2012, as well as documents related to the above unauthorized theft of documents on account of the promotion committee.”

In addition, around 11:15 on February 6, 2013, the investigation of the Sungnam Police Station and the intelligence team office of the above sports was present as a complainant and stated to the above purport.

However, in fact, the Defendant was well aware of the fact that there was a defect in the notice of convening the promotion committee's meeting for the resolution to dismiss the promotion committee member held on December 18, 2012, and the rejection of a written resolution by 61 members of the promotion committee submitted by D, etc. on the same day, and the fact that it is difficult to accept the report of the promotion committee member submitted at the time of Sungnam-nam on January 11, 2013 was presented with explanation from L who is a public official in charge, and on January 16, 2013, the Defendant was notified of the failure to report the change from the above L to dismiss the promotion committee member, and the Defendant did not have the authority to act on behalf of the promotion committee chairperson.