The judgment below

The part of the defendant D against the defendant is reversed.

Defendant

D shall be punished by fine for negligence of KRW 7,000,000.

Defendant .

The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because each punishment of the court below is too unreasonable.

Judgment

A. In a case where a business entity that is commonly unfavorable to the Defendants selects a tenant, it shall be selected in accordance with the order determined by the Regulations on Housing Supply. However, if there are competition in the same order of priority, it shall be determined by the general supply method that selects a tenant. However, disabled persons, persons with distinguished service to the State, persons with distinguished service to long-term service, and persons with long-term service, and persons with doctors, etc. may be specially supplied within the limit of 10% of the total number of sales units. In the case of an apartment building constructed at a location with a good location, the likelihood of special supply by the persons with poor competition among the occupants due to general supply is raised monthly.

As above, the defendants are more likely to be selected as residents compared to those eligible for general supply, and the defendants applied for the sale of apartments under the name of the disabled persons who are unable to apply for the sale of apartments due to lack of economic ability, thereby artificially raising the probability of winning prizes, and as a result, once the right to sell apartments is won, they resell the right to sell apartments to the public immediately.

The above crime is a highly detrimental crime to society by abusing the special sale system for persons with disabilities to impede fairness in the selection process of persons with disabilities in the new apartment sale process, causing damage to persons with disabilities who are bona fide users, encouraging real estate speculation, and disturbing housing supply order. It is highly necessary to eradicate it through strict punishment.

B. The judgment of Defendant A is recognized as favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant, who led to the confession of the instant crime, reflects the depth of the mistake, and that the Defendant is a person with a disability of Grade IV with a delay disability.

However, the defendant directly receives documents necessary for the application for parcelling-out from disabled persons by taking advantage of his status as the president.