The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. On June 24, 2016, the main point of the grounds for appeal is that the victim attended the meeting of the representatives of occupants of the Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government apartment complex C (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”) at issue, and the account that received the shortage of operating expenses and white money is “personal account of the victim” or “personal account of the elderly”, and finally recognized the victim as “personal account of the victim”.

Therefore, the contents of the decision of the above meeting of the representative of the above tenant on June 27, 2016, stating the following as follows: “The victim and the senior citizen association's unfair operation related to the operation of the elderly's association on June 24, 2016” as the resolution of the above meeting of the representative of the elderly resident on June 27, 2016, stating 460,000 won per month as the monthly certificate of the report of the elderly's family, "the above amount is not received at the time of the receipt (the victim's account of the recipient's chairperson) or the withdrawal of the area of the Gu office,” which the victim voluntarily recognized,

Even if it is not so, the defendant is the chairperson of the tenant representative meeting of the apartment of this case at the time, and the management entity should disclose the results of the meeting of the tenant representative meeting to the bulletin board and the integrated information center.

In accordance with Article 30(2) of the apartment management agreement of this case, the purport that “the victim shall receive insufficient operating expenses and whites as an individual account,” which is the resolution of the meeting of the representatives of occupants on June 24, 2016, is merely a public announcement of the purport that “the victim shall receive insufficients of operating expenses and whites for the elderly,” which constitutes an “political act” that is not unlawful.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which convicted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts or legal principles.

2. Determination

A. The victim appears to have attended the meeting of the representatives of occupants on June 24, 2016 (see, e.g., evidence No. 3 attached to the written opinion of the Defendant on April 10, 2018, submitted by the Defendant at the trial). However, the injured party is actually at the meeting of the representatives of occupants.