The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the following circumstances, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, by misapprehending the legal principles.

A. The facts charged of the instant case did not state that the instant building was changed to the purpose of accommodation, but whether it was changed to any of the detailed items among accommodation facilities, so the facts charged was specified to the extent that the Defendant can exercise his right to defense.

shall not be deemed to exist.

B. Since the construction laws and regulations stipulating the use of a building does not include “water protection business” in the use of a building, the instant building offered to “water protection business” is not included in the subject of the regulation of the construction laws and regulations, and considering the structure, function, use form, etc. of the instant building, the building was changed to an accommodation facility, which is “business facility group” under the Building Act.

shall not be deemed to exist.

(c)

The Defendant, from a certified architect or a fire-fighting facility operator who has experience in constructing a facility of “water protection business,” the Defendant heard that the “water protection business” is possible to run a neighboring living facility, and changed the purpose of use of the building of this case. Therefore, there is no intention of violation of the Building Act.

2. Determination

A. Article 2(1)2-2 of the former Building Act (wholly amended by Act No. 8974, Mar. 21, 2008) provides that “The term “the use of a building water” means the combination of the types of buildings according to the structure, purpose of use, and form similar to those of the building.” Article 2(2) of the same Act and Article 3-4 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Building Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2168, Aug. 5, 2009; hereinafter “former Enforcement Decree of the Building Act”) upon delegation of the same Act provides that “The specific use of each building and each use shall be defined respectively.

In full view of the contents of the above provisions, it is not specified in attached Table 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the former Building Act.