If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

C 변론이 분리되었다. 는 경남 하동군 D 외 4필지의 건물 소유주 및 부설주차장의 관리책임이 있는 자이고, 피고인은 2012. 5.경부터 2013. 8.경까지 위 건물의 부설주차장에 가설건축물을 설치하고 뻥튀기와 아이스크림을 판매하는 자이다.

Except for cases meeting the standards prescribed by Presidential Decree, no annexed parking lot shall be used for purposes other than parking lots.

그럼에도 불구하고 피고인은 2012. 5.경부터 2013. 8.경까지 위 건물이 주차수요를 유발하는 시설에 해당하여 설치된 부설주차장 23㎡(주차대수 2대)에서 뻥튀기, 아이스크림 등을 판매할 목적으로 가설건축물을 설치하여 주차장 외의 용도로 사용하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of the defendant and C

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol against the defendant and C

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. A written statement;

1. General table of the building register, general table table, aggregate building register, copy of cadastral map, land cadastre, site photograph, each investigation report (referring to attachment of the current status of a building, attachment of site photographs, attachment of site photographs, etc.), current status of a building, status of an access road to an annexed parking lot, current status of an annexed parking lot, status of an annexed parking lot, cadastral survey result map, current status of an annexed parking

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the Defendant did not have any intention to violate the Parking Lot Act, since they were entirely unaware of the fact that the place where the Defendant installed a guard was a parking lot site.

On May 2012, the following circumstances revealed by the evidence of the above evidence, namely, C, at an investigative agency, was unable to carry out funeral services due to the Defendant’s failure to parcel out the land of the building site, and C, upon requesting G’s wife to allow him/her to carry out funeral services on the parking lot site. G is a temporary building from 10:00 to 18:00, which is the time limit for the prohibition of vehicle traffic in the building site.