Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a certified architect who operates the “D office” located in Northern-gu C at Port and Port.

Any person who acts as an agent for a permitting authority for a field investigation, inspection, or verification shall report in writing the results of such on-site investigation, inspection, or verification to the competent permitting authority, as prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, and shall not make

The Defendant: (a) delegated the authority to permit construction to conduct on-site surveys, inspections, and confirmations with respect to retail stores of one story and a total floor area of 198.89 square meters (Class 1 neighborhood living facilities, light-scale steel structure) on a site of 267 square meters in Northern-gu, Northern-gu; and (b) on behalf of the Defendant with the authority to permit construction.

On February 28, 2017, the Defendant: (a) conducted a field investigation on the said land and confirmed that F, the owner of the construction, changed the form and quality of the land without obtaining permission from the head of the North Korean port; (b) on the same day, submitted an application for a building permit to the North Korean office at the port port on the same day; (c) prepared a false report on the “report on building permit investigation and inspection” as “unnecessary for building site creation and change in the form and quality; and (d) reported it to the head of the North

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the examination of partially the police officers of the accused;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. A written accusation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a building permit application, building permit report and inspection report;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts and Articles 109 and 27 (2) of the Building Act on the Selection of Punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the assertion is that the Defendant had already cut the building owner’s unauthorized act at the time of preparing “the report on the investigation and inspection of the building permit” and thereafter, it is deemed that there was no need to change the form and quality of the building site at the time, and thus, the Defendant did not have any awareness of

2. The judgment in this Court is legitimate.