Supreme Court Confirms Fine for Apartment Manager Who Tore Down Resident Representative's Notice

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Daehyun] The head of an apartment management office who tore down a notice posted by a resident representative, with whom he usually had a bad relationship, without justifiable reason, was fined by the Supreme Court.

On the 16th, the Supreme Court's 2nd Division (Presiding Justice Jo Jaeyeon) announced that it upheld the lower court's ruling sentencing apartment management office head A to a fine of 1 million won in the appeal trial on charges of obstruction of business.

Earlier, in August 2019, A, working as the management office head at Apartment B in Goyang-si, Gyeonggi Province, was prosecuted for obstruction of business for tearing down a notice posted in each apartment elevator by resident representative C, with whom he had a poor relationship, to inform residents about complaints related to a transformer accident.

Article 314, Paragraph 1 of the current Criminal Act stipulates, "A person who obstructs another's business by spreading false information or other deceptive means that damage a person's credit, or by force, shall be punished by imprisonment for up to five years or a fine of up to 15 million won."

In court, A's side argued that "C posted the notice in the name of the resident representative meeting without properly convening or passing a resolution of the resident representative meeting, and attached the notice in places other than those designated by the management regulations."

The first trial found A guilty and sentenced him to a fine of 1 million won. The first trial court pointed out, "Even if C posted the notice after obtaining the majority consent of the resident representatives via KakaoTalk without convening or passing a resolution of the resident representative meeting, that alone does not mean that the procedural or substantive illegality of C's work is so severe as to be considered a business without protection value under the crime of obstruction of business."

The second trial also dismissed A's appeal, stating, "The defendant's actions exceeded what can be tolerated under social ethics or social norms." It emphasized, "The notice was compiled and organized by C, the chairman of the resident representative meeting, based on the demands of the apartment residents. Even if there were circumstances where the posting process, specifications, or location did not comply with the management regulations, the majority consent of the resident representatives was obtained."

The Supreme Court also agreed with this judgment. The court stated, "The lower court did not err in its understanding of the business protected under the crime of obstruction of business or the doctrine of justifiable acts," and dismissed the appeal.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.