The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The Defendant is the representative director of the apartment occupant in Daegu North-gu, and the victim C is the managing director of the above apartment.

In fact at the above apartment management office around August 9, 2016, the Defendant did not enter into a contract with the Director of the Management Office to disburse KRW 165 million for the repair cost of the next 10,000,000,000 for the construction cost of the next 10 years, or did not violate such contract. In short, the Defendant breached a contract with the Director of the Management Office to disburse KRW 165,00,000 for the repair cost of the next 10,000,000,000

8. A decision was made to dismiss part of 31.

I shall obtain residents' consent to the results of the meeting.

Various residents' thicknesss shall sign the letter of consent kept in each Dong guard room in the main time.

After preparing the written consent of the resident, “The victim’s reputation was damaged by openly pointing out false facts on the 21 bulletin boards of the above apartment at the time of the same day.”

2. The facts charged in the instant case are the crimes falling under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 312(2) of the Criminal Act.

On December 28, 2016, after the institution of the instant prosecution, C may recognize the fact that he/she expressed his/her intention not to be punished against the Defendant in this Court.

Therefore, the public prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.