The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

(a) Grounds for disqualification under Article 50 (4) 5 of the Enforcement Decree of the Housing Act include not only the offenses committed as the managing body or a member of the relevant apartment but also the offenses related to the management of other apartment units;

Therefore, the criminal history on the ground that the defendant operated without reporting the physical training training in another apartment complex (E apartment), which is not the apartment in question, constitutes a ground for disqualification under the law as a representative of the C apartment occupant.

B. Before receiving the final determination of “Resolution for Removal or Removal” from the court, the Defendant prepared a notice of convening a special meeting for the representatives of occupants on the ground that he/she is qualified as the representative of the occupants of the above apartment complex.

Therefore, the above notice constitutes a private document for qualification.

(c)

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the preparation of a private document with qualification as the representative director of the apartment apartment tenant and the facts charged for the event, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and legal principles.

2. Determination

A. For the reasons indicated in its reasoning, it is difficult to find that the Defendant is a member of the tenant representative meeting who manages the above E apartment complex or other management entity, and it is difficult to recognize that the above he/she operated the above he/she as a non-report, and that he/she lost his/her qualification as the representative of the C apartment resident at the time of preparation and exercise of each

On the ground that this part of the facts charged cannot be seen, was acquitted.

B. Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the records, the following circumstances are revealed, and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone alone is sufficient to give reasonable doubt as to this part of the facts charged.

shall not be deemed to exist.

For the same purpose.