However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The Defendant served as a public official for about 38 years in Busan Island Offices, etc., and retired on June 30, 2010.

On April 2, 2014, the Defendant intended to obtain permission for the alteration of the current state in order to newly build Class 2 neighborhood living facilities with respect to the area subject to permission for the alteration of the current state around the State designated cultural heritage under the Cultural Heritage Protection Act (hereinafter “the instant forest”) at the office of 5th floor in Busan Seo-gu, Busan, and the office of 5th floor of apartment buildings, which is located around the State-designated cultural heritage under the Cultural Heritage Protection Act, by preparing a written proposal for objection against the revocation of the permission for the alteration of the current state, and providing related documents, such as a written response and written response, if the Defendant is subject to the rejection disposition after filing an application for the permission for the alteration of the current state with the head of the cultural heritage office, he/she would ultimately help it obtain permission for the alteration

At the same time, E filed an application for permission for alteration of the current state with the F Design Office that operates the civil engineering and construction design of the instant forest, and agreed with C and its partners to pay KRW 100 million including Defendant’s expenses to the design cost.

After that, on May 31, 2014, G entered into a standard contract for technical service contract amounting to 100 million won with the LAF, and on January 2, 2015, G applied for permission to change the current state surrounding the instant forest to the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration through the head of the Busan-gu Office, Busan-gu, and on March 2, 2015, the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration issued a disposition of refusal.

Around that time, the Defendant provided legal counseling to C and G about the method and procedure of filing an objection, such as filing an administrative appeal for revocation of rejection disposition, and filed an administrative appeal for revocation of rejection disposition on behalf of G on May 1, 2015 on behalf of G, and prepared and submitted the relevant documents, such as a written request and reply, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling to dismiss the appeal.

Until now, the Defendant, from May 31, 2014 to August 29, 2015, shall be the LAF.