The Defendants’ appeal is dismissed.

1. In the grounds of appeal, G Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project Establishment Promotion Committee (hereinafter only referred to as the "Promotion Committee") may carry out the business of directly consenting to the establishment of the association and the consent of the rearrangement project, and the Defendants specified only the business of demanding consent to the establishment of the association and public relations in the form of subcontracting by the Promotion Committee. However, the lower court found the Defendants guilty of having received comprehensive delegation from the Promotion Committee regarding the consent to the establishment of the association and the consent to the rearrangement project.

2. Determination

A. The purport of the judgment of the court below (1) that the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter referred to as the "Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents") required to register the management business of rearrangement projects is to improve the quality of the management business of rearrangement projects by mandatory registration of the management business of rearrangement projects only for those holding a certain amount of capital and technical manpower, thereby promoting efficient implementation of the management

Accordingly, only registered management entities specialized in improvement projects may engage in the business of giving consent to the establishment of an association (Article 69(1)1 of the Do Government Act) (Article 69(1)1 of the Do Government Act). Since the agency refers to performing the business of independently delegated and delegated by the agency, the agency should not be registered as management entities specialized in improvement projects in cases where only a private person of the promotion committee or performance assistant of the promotion committee or the promotion committee is merely a mere human resources supplier in collecting consent forms.

In this regard, the defendants' assertion is reasonable.

Ultimately, in this case, the issue is whether H and I act as an agent for the consent to the establishment of an association or whether it is a simple human resources supplier, and the record is accepted as follows.