beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A and B shall be punished by a fine of 700,000 won and a fine of 300,000 won, respectively.
Reasons
1. The fine imposed on Defendant A and C is not due to an individual illegal act, but inevitably occurred in the course of executing the business of a commercial building. The complaint filed by Defendant A and B also dealt with the act of the J at the level of the commercial building prosperity with respect to the act of the J seeking to mislead the commercial building prosperity. Thus, even if the Defendants paid the above fine or paid the cost for the preparation of the complaint, even if the management expenses, etc. were to be paid by the Defendants, the intent of embezzlement and the intent of illegal acquisition cannot be recognized.
Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination
A. The Defendants asserted the same purport in the lower court. The lower court, based on the evidence, held that: (a) Defendants A and C are qualified as the chairperson of the standing committee or the chairperson of the prosperity conference in accordance with the arbitrary judgment of the parties to the different opinion on the ground that the lawsuit seeking confirmation of the absence of the president’s position with respect to K elected by the chairperson of the prosperity conference on April 2012 is underway; and (b) the Defendants are qualified as the chairperson of the standing committee or the chairperson of
In addition, Defendant A and C have received a summary order as stated in the facts constituting a crime in the judgment of the court below by preparing and using a document to gather the relevant qualification and received a summary order as stated in the judgment of the court below; and (2) also, Defendant A and C have recognized the fact that they filed a complaint or petition with respect to the other party's act on the part of the other party who has different opinion, by taking into account the issue of personal misconduct, such as defamation committed against the principal; and (c) have been conducted for the benefit of the organization in light of the payment of fine for such personal misconduct and the personal qualification, or of the complaint or petition filed
such an act as it is necessary to do so.
shall be deemed to be.