건축법위반
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding and misunderstanding of legal principles) was only posted at the construction site at the time of blasting for land excavation at the construction site of this case on the prevention of noise and vibration and the prevention of fugitive dust, but did not posted the contents of the measures to prevent danger and injury caused by land collapse and the work of installing soil mounds.
Nevertheless, the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
2. On the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court found the Defendants not guilty of the facts charged on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendants failed to take necessary measures under Article 41 of the Building Act at the time of the instant construction work or failed to perform a notice related thereto, and that there was no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.
In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and its reasoning, the above judgment of the court below is just.
Therefore, the prosecutor's assertion that the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous or misunderstanding legal principles is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.