beta
Text
Defendant
B shall be punished by a fine of 2,000,000 won.
Defendant
B If the above fine is not paid, 100,000 won.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Victim D was a person who was the head of Sincheon-si E, and Defendant B and A are residents of E community.
Defendant
B leased his own land to E Village Association; on the above land, three buildings owned by the village corresponding to KRW 600,000,000,000 in the market value of the village hall. However, the village council demanded that the village hall be transferred to himself/herself unless the village hall, etc. was removed or the village hall, etc. in his/her own land was removed at the village council, and the victim refused it, demanded that the land owned by the defendant B be sold to the village council at a low price, and there is no good appraisal. As the defendant B conspired to recommend the removal of the head of the village for A and the victim, and the defendant B and the victim made a proposal to the SiF on October 8, 2013 at the house of A located in Dong in Dong on the same day, “E, despite having to collect opinions through the meeting of the village residents during the process of auction, is going through a few meetings without convening a meeting.
A part of the common land in the village of 400 square meters is disposed of by auction, and the land is divided, but the land is not resolved, but only the delivery and receipt room is being settled.
“The written opinion of dismissal of the victim” and “The community hall is forced to be put on compulsory auction, but this Chapter D does not hold the community meeting or enter or take any measure on the matters discussed in our village.
The present Chapter D does not work for the village, and prepared the minutes of the village emergency countermeasures conference with the content of "," and displayed the document by visiting the houses of residents in the E community from November 5, 2013 to November 5, 2013.
However, the facts are as follows: although the facts charged are stated as the "Defendant", it is clear that it is a clerical error, so it is corrected ex officio.
From around 2011, a village meeting was held as an agenda for the village center in this case.