Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, each of the above defendants is against the defendants for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is the president of the N Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Association (hereinafter “instant partnership”) located in Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul. Defendant B is the general director of the instant association, and Defendant C is the office director of the instant association.

around July 30, 2011, the Defendants, while working in the Residents Joint Countermeasure Committee of the instant cooperative before being elected as the executive officer of the instant cooperative, filed a petition for confirmation of invalidity of the general meeting resolution with the Seoul Western District Court on August 25, 2009 to the effect that the resolution of the special meeting resolution of August 19, 2009 on the selection, etc. of the contractor led by the former executive officer of the instant cooperative to the Seoul Western District Court was null and void. The Defendants filed an appeal with the Seoul High Court on September 16, 2010, and continued the appellate trial on July 2012.

However, following the judgment in favor of the Plaintiff in the first instance trial, the Defendants were elected as executive officers of the instant association on July 30, 201, and won the first instance trial on June 1, 2012. The Defendants led to the instant association’s business affairs by withdrawing the said appeal from the former executive branch of the instant association, which is the Defendant in the claim for nullification of the resolution of the said general assembly. On July 9, 2012, the Defendants came to know that the former executive branch of the instant association would hold a board of representatives on July 12, 2012 to make a resolution on the withdrawal of the said appeal.

If the judgment in favor of the plaintiff in the first instance becomes final and conclusive due to the withdrawal of the above appeal, the selection of the trial works becomes null and void, and the current enforcement department including the defendants must perform duties, such as the selection of a new trial works. Therefore, before the withdrawal of the appeal, the former enforcement department first decides to promptly withdraw the lawsuit from the plaintiff before the withdrawal of the appeal to maintain the existing trial works, and without the consent of the plaintiffs for the prompt withdrawal of the lawsuit.