A. Legal doctrine (as to the violation of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act), in a residential area exclusively for Class I exclusive use of the instant building located, construction of “multi-family housing” is naturally allowed pursuant to Article 76(1) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”) and Article 71(1)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and construction of “multi-family housing” can be allowed as prescribed by the planning ordinance of the Si/Gun. However, inasmuch as the South Yangyang-si market is able to allow construction of “multi-family housing” as prescribed by the planning ordinance of the Si/Gun, it is invalid because it is beyond the scope of delegation of higher-class statutes by district unit planning (No. 2015-256, Oct. 8, 2015; hereinafter “instant notification”).

In addition, the instant house is not a multi-family house, but a multi-family house, and the act permitted by the law as in the instant case is denied as the ordinance of the Si/Gun, and criminal punishment is also a violation of the principle of criminal law.

B. The sentence of the lower court (400 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of the misapprehension of the legal doctrine as to the assertion that the notice of this case violated the superior laws and regulations, is based on the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the first instance court as to the assertion that the notice of this case violated the superior laws and regulations, i.e., district unit planning under the National Land Planning Act is established to rationalize land use, improve its functions, secure a better environment, and manage the relevant area in a systematic and planned manner, and to improve the safety, function, environment, and aesthetic view of buildings.