The Defendants’ appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendants’ act of misunderstanding the legal principles is merely an act of resisting the social rules, namely, that the D Apartment Seniors Association (hereinafter “the Korean Seniors Association”) divided the ballot papers into 10 persons, who are not regular members. The Defendants’ act is merely an act of resisting the passage of ballot boxes in voting instead of voting on the upper part of the ballot boxes, and of demanding a normal voting process.

B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (Defendant A: a fine of 500,000 won, Defendant B: a fine of 300,000 won) is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of misunderstanding legal principles, the defendants asserted that the general meeting for the election of the chairperson of the senior citizens' association was erroneous, thereby obstructing the members present to collectively refuse the election of the senior citizens' association from dividing the ballot papers, preventing the members from signing the elector's list, and preventing the members who have finished voting by taking the ballot boxes from inserting ballot papers into the ballot box, and preventing the members from inserting the ballot papers into the ballot box, thereby obstructing the head of the secretariat of the Mapo-gu Seoul Mapo-gu Senior Citizens' Association E branch secretariat from explaining the progress of holding the special meeting. Meanwhile, the senior citizens' association can recognize the fact that the chairperson recruited 12-13 new members after receiving the admission fee and annual fee

According to the above facts, as argued by the Defendants, their actions do not constitute acts that do not violate the social rules.

The Defendants’ assertion on this part is without merit.

B. As to the assertion on unfair sentencing, the complainants J and G expressed their intent not to punish the Defendants in the original trial, Defendant A did not have been punished heavier than the fine, and Defendant B’s primary charge is the sentencing factor favorable to the Defendants.

However, until the trial, the defendants rationalize and reflect their crimes.