The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is the chief executive officer of the Housing Redevelopment Association in Busan Young-gu District B (hereinafter “instant redevelopment Association”).

Where a member requests the perusal or reproduction of documents and related materials concerning the implementation of an urban environment improvement project, such as the details of deposits and withdrawals of monthly funds, the chairperson of the urban environment improvement project promotion committee or the executives of the association shall comply with such request within 15 days. However, on May 22, 2013, the defendant did not comply with such request within 15 days after he/she received a request from the members C to disclose the details of deposits and withdrawals of the accounts of the redevelopment association of this case.

2. Article 81(6) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) provides that “If a member of the association, or the owner of a plot of land, etc. makes a request for perusal or reproduction of documents related to the implementation of an improvement project, including the documents, etc. under paragraph (1) of the same Article (the details of deposits, withdrawals, etc. for each month), the chairperson of the promotion committee or the project implementer (in cases of a cooperative, the executives of the association or the representative of an urban environment improvement project, if the owners of a plot of land, etc. independently implement the urban environment improvement project) shall comply with such request within 15 days.” Article 86 Subparag. 6 of the same Act provides that “A person shall be punished by imprisonment with labor for not more than one year or by a fine not exceeding 10,000 won.”

On the other hand, Article 21 (1) of the Urban Improvement Act provides that "one head of the partnership, a director, and an auditor" shall be appointed as an executive of the partnership.

However, the facts charged in this case indicate the defendant as the "chief executive officer of the redevelopment association of this case" in its statement itself, and each of the defendant and D.