All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding and legal principles 1) The Defendants merely left H as an agent for business to hold a partnership’s general meeting of the “G Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project”, and did not select H as a specialized management businessman of the rearrangement project under the Urban and Residential Environment Improvement Act regarding the said rearrangement project.

2) The Defendants did not have a subjective perception that the above company should be selected as a management entity specialized in improvement projects while being entrusted with the above services to H. Therefore, there was no criminal intent that the Defendants violated the Urban and Residential Environment Rearrangement Act, which stipulated that the management entity specialized in improvement projects should go through a competitive bid or resolution at a general meeting.

3) Defendant B merely is a member of the said promotion committee rather than the chairperson of the said promotion committee for the establishment of the said promotion committee, and cannot be deemed as the co-offenders with Defendant A, the chairperson of the said promotion committee.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants (a fine of one million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendants alleged that they did not select a management entity specialized in improvement projects (A) also asserted that this part of the appeal was the same as the grounds for appeal, and the lower court, based on the facts and circumstances stated in its reasoning under the title of “determination of the Defendants and their defense counsel”, and without registering with the competent Mayor/Do Governor on May 17, 201 as to the Defendants’ crimes committed around May 17, 201, the lower court entrusted the management entity’s task under the entrustment of the Defendants with the management entity’ work of “acting for the management entity to give consent to the establishment of an association and the consent to a rearrangement project.”

In addition, with respect to the defendants' crimes around August 20, 201, H did not register with the competent Mayor/Do Governor, and without registering with the competent Mayor/Do Governor, the defendants' consent to the establishment of partnership and the maintenance business.