The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Reasons for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding and legal doctrine 1) Defendant 1 had no choice but to convene a meeting on March 22, 2017, in accordance with the lawful request for convocation of representatives and relevant laws and regulations. A resolution for dismissal of union officers at the above representatives’ meeting was made by representatives, not by the Defendant.

2) A resolution to dismiss an executive officer of the said board of representatives was not adopted at the general meeting of the partnership, and thus has no legal effect, and the dismissed persons also performed the duties of the partnership at a normal time thereafter, and cannot be deemed dismissed from office in the payment of both wages and allowances.

3) Using text messages and the newsletters of the union for the resolution of the council members is an ordinary process of business that is naturally conducted in accordance with the resolution of the council members, and it is not an act of promoting the dismissal of an executive officer of the union, unless it is intended to prevent the confusion of business due to the inquiries of the union members.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The Defendant is the president of the partnership for redevelopment and maintenance of F Housing in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E (hereinafter “instant partnership”).

According to the Urban and Residential Environment Rearrangement Act, the appointment and dismissal of executive officers of partnership shall be subject to the resolution of the general meeting of partnership.

At around 17:00 on March 22, 2017, the Defendant: (a) held a board of representatives to resolve to dismiss the president G, general secretary-general H, and auditor who is an executive officer of an association; and (b) around that time notified the members of the relevant fact to the text message and the newsletter of the association.

Accordingly, the defendant dismissed the executive officers of the partnership without resolution of the general meeting of the partnership.

B. Determination 1) The issue of the legal doctrine and the issue of this case is the issue before the Defendant was wholly amended by Act No. 14567 of February 8, 2017 (wholly amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 201).