The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Punishment of the crime

On September 6, 2013, the Defendant, as an agent for on-site inspection and confirmation, conducted a field investigation on a newly-built multi-household building outside Gwangju City, and prepared a report on approval for use and inspection with the content that it conforms to the design drawings (2,100m) at the time of permission, although the separation distance (1,806m) within the completed housing site differs from the design drawings (2,100m) at the time of permission, the Defendant made a false report to the Gwangju City Mayor on July 1, 2014.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Copies of each police statement concerning D;

1. Copy of the supervision report;

1. Copy of the results of the investigation and inspection for use, copy of the results of cadastral status survey, and copy of building layout drawings;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes concerning a copy of the results of surveying the current cadastral status and the results and drawings of the other party of cadastral works;

1. Article 109 of the Building Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Articles 109 and 27 (2) of the Act on the Selection of Punishment;

1. A fine of two million won to be suspended;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act (100,000 won per day);

1. Determination as to the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter “the grounds for sentencing”) of the suspended sentence

1. The alleged defendant was provided with the result of the current status survey conducted on a scale of 1/1200, and based on this, it was confirmed that he/she himself/herself was at the site at that time, and then reported that the construction status of the design drawing and the field was consistent, and thus, the defendant's act does

2. The following circumstances acknowledged based on each of the above evidences, namely, the multi-households of this case, have been destroyed at the time of the initial construction permit, and the Defendant appears to be unable from the beginning to investigate the actual distance of prior notice in the instant site solely on the design drawings or the cadastral status survey results of accumulation of 1/1200 from the construction design office.