The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant did not have been appointed as a manager at the meeting of the management body of the building B (hereinafter “instant building”), the Defendant, as a representative of the executing company, managed the instant building with the care of a good manager until the management body commences under the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings (hereinafter “Building Act”).

The F, an unqualified manager, responding to the urgent situation in which the F, and sending a written request for transfer of duties, and there was a clerical error in the certificate of contents sent, and was the minimum self-defense of the Defendant.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to evidence of misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles on the assertion of mistake of facts, the complainant sent a written request for transfer of management affairs to the defendant who was in charge of the building of this case by asserting that the latter was appointed as the manager at the general meeting of the management body on January 16, 2018, and the defendant sent the written request for transfer of management affairs to F in the name of the manager of the building of this case. The content certification of this case expressed again that the defendant or the defendant representing the defendant is the "representative of the management body" and the "manager". The content of this case also shows Article 33(2) of the Multi-Family Building Act, which is the provision for convening the management body meeting, which is the provision for convening the management body meeting by the sectional owners upon the request of the sectional owners, and it is acknowledged that the elected F cannot be recognized as the manager without the procedure under the above provision

According to this, the defendant's qualification as the manager (representative of the management body) of the building of this case is ambiguous, and it cannot be said that the expression was written in writing.

According to evidence, H has filed an application with F to suspend the performance of duties after the instant case.