Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 5,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

The above fine is imposed against the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A

(a) A person who intends to erect a retaining wall or any other structure in violation of the Building Act shall report it to the competent authority, as prescribed by Presidential Decree;

Nevertheless, on October 8, 2017, the Defendant, without filing a report on the construction of a structure, installed a sn beamline over a section of 15.54m from the snicker, etc. for the construction of a retaining wall on the boundary of the E land at the Snju City and C and D, and on the boundary of the E land at Snju City.

B. A person who intends to engage in development activities, such as changing the form and quality of land, etc., shall obtain permission from the competent authority, but the Defendant, without obtaining permission from the competent authority on October 8, 2017, cut off the boundary of the land C and D and E site near the land in Innju City, the Defendant changed the form and quality of the land by 24 meters in length, 122 square meters in size, and 3.69 meters in height.

2. Although Defendant B was prohibited from running construction business without registering the said registration with the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, the Defendant, without filing the said registration from September 27, 2017 to October 8, 2017, received from F, the owner of the building, the amount of KRW 30,000,000 from F, the owner of the building, and carried on construction business by carrying on construction business by carrying out “soil removal construction business” falling under “soil construction business” among “Grara Corporation” on the ground of the above land.

Summary of Evidence

Facts No. 1

1. The defendant A's partial statement

1. Each legal statement of the witness H, I, B, J, and K;

1. The suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant A by the police;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion and judgment as to additional materials related to the accusation (23) and the actual ground plan (25) of the present situation

A. Defendant A’s defense counsel argues that it is improper to hold Defendant A liable for the facts charged because Defendant A is merely a co-owner and is not a de facto owner.

However, the evidence adopted and examined by this court is examined.