Defendants shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, only 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

B is the chairperson of the 13th meeting of the representatives of the pre-existing occupants, and the defendant A is the management complaint of the DNA apartment belonging to the E Co., Ltd.

D The representative meeting of apartment occupants was imposed an administrative fine of KRW 2 million on October 2015 on the ground that the E Company, which failed to comply with the conditions specified in the notice of the tender, was selected as an apartment management entity and entered into a contract with the price different from the bid price.

In connection with the management of multi-family housing, occupants and users, management entities, representatives of occupants and their members shall not illegally acquire or provide property or property benefits.

1. Defendant B paid an administrative fine of KRW 1.6 million at a discount of KRW 2 million at the representative meeting of the above apartment occupants, and the said amount is to be borne by E Co., Ltd., the managing body of the above apartment, according to the decision of the representative meeting of occupants, and was issued KRW 1.6 million by E Co., Ltd. on March 3, 2016.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired property or property benefits in relation to the management of collective housing unlawfully.

2. Defendant A presented an agenda relating to the decision to pay an administrative fine of KRW 1.6 million paid by the president B of the representative meeting of the above apartment occupants to the resident representative meeting, and on March 3, 2016, Defendant A had the representative F of the E Co., Ltd. deliver the said amount to B.

As a result, the Defendant, in collusion with F, failed to enter “in collusion” in the facts charged while changing the indictment orally.

However, both Defendants and F conspired.

In revising the contents of the indictment written in collusion with F, the indictment was modified to the effect that Defendant A belongs to the delivery of property in collusion with F, and the “Article 30 of the Criminal Act” stated in the applicable law, so to the extent that it does not infringe the identity of the facts charged and the Defendant’s right of defense.