In addition, the building and electric installations of the instant case were occupied by the Joseon Shipbuilding Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Treatment Shipbuilding”) and the Defendant was not in possession of the Defendant by exercising the right of retention.

Therefore, although the defendant cannot be seen as the owner or possessor of the electric installations of this case, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court’s judgment convicting the Defendant of the instant charges on the ground that the Defendant was found to have dismissed an electrical safety manager and did not appoint a new electrical safety manager around January 8, 2015 as the occupant of the electric installations of the instant case, is just and acceptable, and there was no error of misunderstanding the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine as alleged by the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

① The fact that the Defendant entered into a real estate trust agreement on the instant building with the Korea Land Trust around June 14, 2012, and newly constructed the instant building and registered the preservation of ownership in the name of C Co., Ltd. around July 2, 2012; and that the Korea Land Trust Co., Ltd. registered the transfer of ownership as a trustee on the same day.

In this regard, Article 9(1) of the Trust Contract provides that "the truster shall continue to possess and use the trust property in fact, and shall bear the actual management activities, such as preservation, repair, etc. of the trust property, and all the expenses incurred therein.

“.....”