beta
Text
Defendant
A shall be punished by fine for negligence of KRW 2,000,00, and by fine of KRW 1,000,000, respectively.
The defendants are the defendants.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
A The representative of the corporation E, the director of the corporation E, and the defendant C are the names of the defendant A.
In the case No. 1170 of the Seocho-gu Seoul Western District Public Prosecutor’s Office (Seoul Western District Public Prosecutor’s Office) in around 2013, the Defendants stated that the subcontracted construction was conducted on March 2015, and stated that the subcontracted construction was conducted. The Defendants were somewhat different from the Defendant’s statement on the timing of the subcontracted construction. Even if the construction was performed under a subcontract for construction works related to the F apartment of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (former apartment name “G”), the Defendants were entrusted with the exercise of the right of retention by H that the Defendants did not receive KRW 30 million of the construction cost.
On February 5, 2017, I asserted that part of the shares of the members of the above apartment association was transferred to Defendant A around February 2, 2017. On March 5, 2017, I agreed to conclude a sales contract with Defendant A’s wife L as the purchaser of the F apartment (which is stated only in the sales contract without specific entry in the Dong and lake number) with the purchase price of KRW 375,00,000, the purchase price of which is KRW 375,000. The purchase price was decided to be decided. The ownership of the J association and the ownership of the J association and managed by K as the Si Corporation without permission.
1. Joint crimes committed by Defendant A and Defendant C
A. On March 1, 2017, Defendants in violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint residential intrusion) reported the network by Defendant C in front of “G” apartment 604 managed by the victim K in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul, Inc. at around 20:00, on the ground that Defendant C exercised the right of retention, and Defendant C entered the password of 604 on the 604 suspender digital fingers known to Defendant B from the preceding day to open the door, and entered the ward and each room.
As a result, the Defendants jointly intruded on the buildings managed by the Victim K.
(b).