The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty on the ground that the defendant's act does not violate the social norms and constitutes a legitimate act, and thus, constitutes an offense under Article 20 of the Criminal Act, is erroneous in the misunderstanding of legal principles. 2) Although the defendant's act is not admissible as evidence of illegal collection, the court below acknowledged the admissibility of such secret recording as evidence and used it as evidence of guilt. The judgment below is erroneous in the misunderstanding of legal principles.

B. Even if the Defendant was guilty of an unreasonable sentencing determination, the sentence of a fine of KRW 500,000 imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of the misapprehension of legal principles as to the assertion of legal principles 1) "act which does not violate social rules" under Article 20 of the Criminal Act refers to an act which is acceptable in light of the overall legal order or the social ethics or social norms surrounding it. Whether certain act is justified as an act that does not violate social rules and thus, the illegality should be determined individually under specific circumstances. Thus, in order to recognize such a legitimate act, the following requirements should be met: (a) legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act; (b) reasonableness of the means or method of the act; (c) balance between the protected interest and the infringed interest; (iv) balance between the legal interests of the protected interest and the infringed interest; and (v) supplement of the means or method other than the act.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Do6999 Decided October 23, 2008). However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant was in conflict with the victim due to the re-contract problems of the housing management company, and the victim among the council of occupants' representatives.