All appeals filed by the Defendants and by the Prosecutor against Defendant A are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., both types of punishment) that the court below declared against the Defendants (e.g., imprisonment of 10 months and collection of 87,194,600 won, Defendant B: imprisonment of 10 months and collection of 87,194,600 won, Defendant B: one year of suspended sentence of 6 months), asserts that the Defendants are too unlimited and unfair, and the prosecutor argues that it is too

2. Determination

A. The crime of this case against Defendant A (hereinafter in this paragraph referred to as the “Defendant”) was committed on behalf of the chairman of the council of occupants’ representatives of the apartment complex. Although the Defendant was obligated to faithfully and fairly handle the business for the common interest of the occupants on behalf of the occupants as the chairman of the council of occupants’ representatives, the Defendant acquired money and valuables from the company responsible for repairing the defects of the apartment complex up to KRW 87 million in exchange for illegal solicitation from the company responsible for the repair of the defects of the apartment complex, and acquired 5 million won in collusion with the apartment trading company by means of including embezzlement of the amount of KRW 38 million of the council of occupants’ representatives, which was in possession of the business, by taking advantage of the status of the chairman or vice-chairman of the council of occupants’ representatives or embezzlement of KRW 96 million in total, and thus, the liability for the crime was not easy. The act was committed on behalf of the chairman of the council of occupants’ representatives, which was committed on behalf of the chairman of the council of occupants’ representatives, it is recognized that there is a need to actively cope with the need for democratic and social development of the apartment.