No project owner may use or allow anyone to use a building unless he/she has obtained approval for use.

Nevertheless, on October 2016, the Defendant leased the foregoing multi-household 4 floor area of 137.3 square meters to the tenants of the above multi-household 4 floor without obtaining approval for use at the above place, and had them use the building without obtaining approval for use.

2. Determination

A. A person who leased a building prior to approval for the use of the building as stated in the summary of the allegation is the co-construction E (the defendant's attachment) who is not the defendant.

B. The facts charged in a criminal trial should be proved by the prosecutor, and the judge should be convicted with evidence of probative value, which leads to the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt of guilt against the defendant, the interest of the defendant should be determined (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do10787, May 28, 2009). According to the records of this case, the owner of the building of this case was originally E around July 25, 2016; the said E was changed to the co-owner of the building of this case; the said E was moved into the fourth floor of the building of this case after concluding a lease contract with D around August 20, 2016, and had him/her move into the building before obtaining approval for use of the building. According to the above lease contract, only the lessor column is written in E, and the facts related to the Defendant was not entirely recorded (see, e.g., evidence).

According to the above facts, E, the main owner of a joint building, apart from the possibility of being punished for a violation of the Building Act in connection with the occupancy prior to approval for use, is also aware of another joint building owner's use of a building for which the defendant has not obtained approval for use, or of the above violation of the Building Act.