The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. From December 24, 2008 to December 24, 2008, the Defendant is a person who is working for the president of the partnership in the E-Housing Redevelopment Development Project Association located in Cheongju-si, Nowon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

Any change in the cost of maintenance project pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance of Urban and Residential Environments (hereinafter referred to as the "Act on the Maintenance of Urban Areas") shall undergo a resolution of a general meeting.

Nevertheless, on March 22, 2017, the Defendant submitted a report on the change of the cost of the maintenance project, which reduced the cost of the maintenance project to KRW 864,520,471,400, as decided July 30, 2016, without going through the resolution of the general meeting at the office of the Cheongju City Urban Planning and Residential Environment Improvement Team (hereinafter “the instant report on change”). Accordingly, the Defendant reported the change of the cost of the maintenance project without going through the resolution of the general meeting.

2. According to the following facts and circumstances acknowledged as a result of the examination of evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, the defendant's act constitutes a case where the defendant's act does not constitute a crime.

① Article 85 subparag. 5 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions (Penal Provisions) provides that an executive officer of a cooperative who voluntarily promotes a project under any subparagraph of Article 24 (3) shall be punished without a resolution by a general meeting under Article 24 (Holding of General Meeting and Resolution). Article 24 (3) provides that “matters prescribed by Presidential Decree or the articles of incorporation as necessary to determine important matters, such as imposing economic burdens on members, etc.” shall be one of the matters subject to a resolution by a general meeting. Article 34 (Matters subject to resolution by a general meeting) of the Enforcement Decree of the said Act provides for the modification of “project cost” under subparagraph 4 as matters subject to a resolution by a general meeting. This is to be interpreted as the resolution by a general meeting so that the executive officer may reflect his/her intent in order to prevent the increase of project cost at will.