The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) the Defendant, as a non-professional, trusted the opinion of the Director of the Management Office, who is an expert, on operating expenses and expenses.

Therefore, there was a perception or intent of the Defendant to violate the duties as the president of the resident representative meeting, or there was a perception or intent to inflict damage on the resident representative meeting for the interest of himself/herself or a third party.

It is difficult to see it.

Judgment

The following facts and circumstances acknowledged by evidence, i.e., the chairperson of the occupants' representative meeting, the defendant, who is the chairperson of the occupants' representative meeting, shall perform his duties with due care as a good manager with regard to the matters prescribed by the management rules, and there is no room for other interpretation because the management rules of the apartment of this case clearly limit the operating expenses of the occupants' representative meeting.

H With respect to the partial payment of the expenses of this case (such as death aid and the refund money for the commemoration of a kindergarten opening)

“,” but the Defendant was forced to incur expenditures;

The defendant, who is the chairperson of the tenant representative meeting, is in a position to manage and supervise the affairs of the management director, so expenses against the management rules have been disbursed in accordance with the opinion of the management director.

In full view of the facts that the Defendant’s act cannot be justified, the Defendant’s expenses incurred do not necessarily seem to have been necessary for the operation of the resident representative meeting, and that the annual conference meal expenses of the representative meeting on December 26, 2016 and December 15, 2017 were treated as “miscellaneous expenses” and were stated as being disbursed regardless of the operating expenses of the resident representative meeting on the account, and that the actual and form of the disbursement is inconsistent with that of the expense. In full view of the fact that the Defendant had the awareness and intent of the Defendant as to occupational breach of trust or occupational breach of trust.

I would like.