beta
Text
All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant, as the head of the E Urban Environment Rearrangement Project Association (hereinafter “instant association”)’s association at the time and time as indicated in the facts of the crime in the judgment below, committed a summary indictment against the Defendant for the violation of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (Seoul Central District Court 2013Ma4644, hereinafter “Seoul Central District Court”), and filed a request for a formal trial, and filed a request for a formal trial with the Defendant. The Defendant, upon entering into a delegation contract with the B law firm on the instant case, remitted 50,000 won out of the expenses for the management of the association to B bank under the name of the law firm for the first time as a lawsuit. However, the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “the instant case”), provided that the Defendant who is in the status of an association’s partnership’s executives for the matters arising in the course of performing the affairs of the association. As such, the Defendant’s payment of attorney’s fees from the association’s operating expenses is lawful, and the Defendant did not have any mistake or any part of the facts.
B. Prosecutor 1) Compared to mistake of facts or legal advice contract on the part of innocence as indicated in the judgment of the court below (hereinafter “instant advisory contract”).
(2) The lower court acquitted the Defendant on this part of the facts charged, by misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the relevant legal principles, even though it is related only to the Defendant’s criminal case (a criminal case in breach of trust) and is not related to the partnership’s business. (2) The sentence (a fine of KRW 800,000) imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is too
2. Determination
A. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.