Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

On December 16, 2016, the defendant claimed as a legitimate manager of the Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office Office Officetel (hereinafter referred to as the "officetel of this case") and a provisional disposition was issued to the effect that the defendant's execution of duties is suspended by the Seoul Western District Court.

On the other hand, the victim D is the representative director of the E in charge of the instant officetel building from around 2002 to around 2010.

"2017 High 564" Defendant’s office located in the instant officetel on January 9, 2017, with the thickness of the owner of the instant officetel.

The title "(Omission)" includes all expenses to be used as the cost of maintaining the repair of the building, such as the long-term repair appropriation fund, due to the occupational breach of trust, embezzlement, etc. of all managers.

That is the cause of the former administrator's non-liability.

In this situation, D (representative of the management company) which has managed Ctel by the management company "E" from the beginning of the occupancy, has made a statement to the effect that the prosecution has lapsed, although the crime is recognized.

In addition, it interferes with the normal management of the management group by instigating several owners of one name, and covers the principal's embezzlement.

( omitted) A document stating “The document of this case” (hereinafter “the document of this case”) was prepared, and around that time, a separate owner of approximately 210 households of this case sent the document of this case by registered mail along with a written complaint against the victim.

However, there was no fact that the victim did not recognize the fact that he embezzled the long-term repair allowances, etc., and that there was no fact that the statute of limitations has lapsed.

Nevertheless, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts.

The Defendant embezzled the instant officetel 502 around March 13, 2017, and the victim embezzled the long-term repair reserve of the instant officetel.