A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. The Defendant, as the president of the Korea Village Association, was the head of the Do Village Association in Doo-si. The Defendant, upon receiving a civil petition from a village resident even though it was a construction work that had been duly permitted or reported by the Doo-si in the case of construction work, such as new construction of fences, was aware of the fact that the construction is suspended and delayed until the civil petition is resolved. The Defendant, with the knowledge of the same attitude, pointed out a minor problem at the construction site or filed a civil petition at the construction site using the status of village relocation, etc., and tried to receive money and valuables as the name of the village development

Around April 2010, the Defendant had been aware that the victim F (F), E (V), and 43 years old, performed the civil construction works for building construction on the land outside G and three lots adjacent to the said land (the site where the community hall is newly constructed; hereinafter “community site”) and agreed to the Defendant’s construction works for landscaping using natural rocks located at the construction site at the boundary of the Haba site located adjacent to the said land (the site where the community hall is newly constructed; hereinafter “community site”). As above, the Defendant was aware that the natural landscape construction works are partially invaded upon the site of the community hall.

Around October 2010, the Defendant decided to newly construct a community hall at the site of the community hall. Around October 2010, the Defendant agreed to obtain approval for the use of the community hall’s access road in order to obtain permission for new construction works from the city. Recognizing that a road of four meters wide from the G land to be used as a community access road is owned by a victim F, the Defendant was aware that the road in the width of the G land to be used as a community access road is owned

The Defendant called the victim E several times from around that time to November 2010, or found the construction site at the above construction site, thereby leaving the victim E with the sign “influencesing the boundary, embling the defect according to the law,” and leaving the door, and then allowing the victim to use it on the land access to the village hall.”