The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact misunderstanding 1) The Defendant collected printed matter distributed by some occupants (hereinafter “the instant document”). However, the occupants who distributed the instant document may express their opinions according to official procedures, and as such, the Defendant collected the instant document to the extent that there was any content contrary to the management rules.

Even if the utility of the document of this case is not impaired, there is no possibility of constituting the elements of the crime of concealing the document, and the intention cannot be recognized.

2) Since Defendant only collected the instant documents that were illegally distributed in accordance with the management rules, the illegality is dismissed in accordance with Article 20 of the Criminal Act.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The following facts acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, that the defendant collected opinions on the increase of wages from the employees of the management office in Gwangju apartment B (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”) with the head of the management office (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”). The resident C, D, etc. of the apartment of this case distributed the documents of this case by inserting the mail of each apartment of this case in order to present the opposing opinion on the payment of management expenses for the employees of the management office, and to obtain the consent of more than all occupants, and the representative meeting of the occupants of the apartment of this case did not have any special restrictions on the method of collecting opinions on the increase of wages from the management office employees. Thus, it is difficult to view that the distribution of printed materials is prohibited, and since the defendant's criminal act prevents access to the dissenting opinion, the apartment of this case affected the effectiveness of the document of this case by itself.

It is reasonable to view this as indicated in the instant document.