The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles) urban and residential environment law imposes an obligation to disclose information on the Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Association on the premise that the claimant bears the actual expenses. However, the Defendant, the president of the partnership, agreed to receive a uniform of KRW 1,000 per head of the F, etc. requesting the disclosure of information, and copy and copy the data related to the implementation of the rearrangement project. As such, it is unlawful in Bupyeong-gu Office to give a corrective order by specifying the actual expenses per head of Chapter 1 as KRW 100, without disregarding the agreement between the parties. Therefore, the Defendant did not comply with the corrective order.

Even a crime is not a crime.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. The summary of the facts charged is the head of the association of the D Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project.

On November 12, 2014, the Defendant received a letter from the head of Bupyeong-gu Office of the Bupyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office for the Development and Improvement Project for D Housing in the second floor of the building of Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, and continued to receive a letter of “order for correction related to the disclosure of data following the implementation of the Improvement Project” from the head of Bupyeong-gu, Bupyeong-gu at the same place on the 14th of the same month.

Each of the above official questions is that "the disclosure is made in return for 100 won per copy of the data related to the request for disclosure of information requested by members F, etc. to the defendant," but the defendant demanded the above F, etc. to pay a uniform of KRW 1,000 per head, and the defendant did not comply with the corrective order of the competent Gu office.

B. On October 6, 2014, the lower court and the first instance court acknowledged the evidence duly adopted and examined, namely, ① Nonparty F and 21, on the premise that the Defendant assumed the Defendant’s share of KRW 1,000 per head of the D Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project Cooperative, which is the head of the Cooperative, the Defendant demanded the disclosure of information on the data related to the implementation of the rearrangement Project, but filed a civil petition to the effect that the reproduction cost required by the said Cooperative is unfair at Bupyeong-gu Office around November 2014, and ② Accordingly, the Defendant filed a civil petition.