Nevertheless, around March 10, 2012, the Defendant remodeled the housing and warehouse owned by the Defendant in Hongcheon-gun, Gangwon-do, and installed and expanded the glass of about 30.72m2m2 on the second floor of detached houses, without obtaining permission from the competent authorities, and created and expanded the panel roof on the second floor of the warehouse of about 83.34m2m2.

2. The extension of the building above the defendant's change in contents is extended to the defendant's father D, but the defendant was not the defendant's father D.

3. Article 108(1) of the Building Act provides for punishing a project owner and contractor who have constructed, repaired, or altered the use of, a building in violation of Article 11(1) of the Building Act.

However, Article 2(1)12 of the Building Act provides that "the owner shall place an order for construction works on the construction, substantial repair, or change of the use of a building, installation of building equipment, or construction of a structure, or have an on-site manager to perform such construction works on his/her own," and Article 2(1)16 of the Building Act provides that "the contractor shall be "the person who performs construction works under Article 2(4)

Therefore, it is examined whether the defendant is a person who is a project owner or contractor under the above provision.

Among the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the statement of the accused in the interrogation protocol of the accused prepared by the judicial police assistant among the interrogation protocol of the accused is denied by the accused, and thus, it is inadmissible, and the statement of the written opinion prepared by the judicial police officer is not accepted by the testimony of the person who prepared it

This case is a case for which the defendant requested a formal trial against a summary order, and the prosecutor has prosecuted summary prosecution and has no admissibility of evidence.