In cases where an attached parking lot prescribed by the Parking Lot Act is used for any purpose other than a parking lot, whether the statute of limitations for a violation of Article 29 (1) of the Parking Lot Act shall run (negative

Article 29(1) of the former Parking Lot Act (amended by Act No. 5115, Dec. 29, 1995) provides that "use of a annexed parking lot for any purpose other than a parking lot" shall be punished. Thus, if the defendant leased an annexed parking lot and used it for any purpose other than a parking lot, if the attached parking lot was used for any purpose other than a parking lot, the statute of limitations shall not run until the time it continues to be illegal.

Articles 19-4(1) and 29(1) of the former Parking Lot Act (amended by Act No. 5115 of Dec. 29, 1995)

Defendant

Prosecutor

Seoul District Court Decision 98No6861 delivered on November 27, 1998

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul District Court Panel Division.

Before determining the grounds of appeal, we examine it ex officio.

The court below ruled that "the defendant used it for purposes other than parking lots by altering and leasing the indoor parking lot attached to the 19-52 underground floor store and the 19-52th underground floor store located in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul, Eunpyeong-gu, Seoul, 1994 to December 2, 197, for the purpose other than parking lots", as to the facts charged, "it is an immediate crime that falls under Article 29 (1) and Article 19-4 (1) of the former Parking Lot Act (amended by Act No. 5115 of Dec. 29, 195) and the crime is established and completed at the time of changing the purpose of use as a crime, and the statute of limitations has run immediately from the time of changing the purpose of use, so the prosecution of this case, for which three years have passed since the date of changing the purpose of use, was completed and acquitted.

However, Article 29(1) of the former Parking Lot Act provides that "use of a annexed parking lot for any purpose other than a parking lot" shall be punished. Thus, if the defendant leased an annexed parking lot and used it for any purpose other than a parking lot, the act of using it for any purpose other than a parking lot and its illegality continues, so the statute of limitations does not run until

Nevertheless, the lower court determined that the statute of limitations has run since an attached parking lot was terminated as soon as the attached parking lot changes for any purpose other than the parking lot.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Justices Lee Don-hee (Presiding Justice)