The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A The prosecution against A is dismissed.

Defendant

B. Defendant B is innocent.

1. According to the ex officio determination of Defendant A, the record reveals that the Defendant died on November 23, 2019, which was after the judgment of the court below was rendered. Thus, the public prosecution against the Defendant is dismissed pursuant to Articles 363(1) and 328(1)2 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

2. Judgment on Defendant B

A. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) is the direction of the construction of the instant stone shed (Definition below), and the Defendant did not instruct it.

B. On January 2016, the Defendant, without obtaining permission for development from the original state mayor, and the Defendant ordered the construction business operator C to perform construction, and the Defendant recruited a stone shed, which is a structure, by paying part of the construction cost.

After that, the defendant and A were identified as L as of January 2016, but there are many parts indicated as C before the opening of the name in the record, so the defendant and A are indicated as C to reduce the possibility of confusion.

The same shall also apply to less than ever.

In order to store approximately 200 tons of tins on the boundary side of Kuju-si D and E, the tin 54m in length and 0.5m in height (hereinafter “the instant stone axis”) was installed without permission for development activities.

C. The lower court’s judgment: (a) lack of evidence to acknowledge the fact that A conspiredd to commit the instant crime with the Defendant or C; (b) the witness C repeatedly made statements to the effect that “the Defendant was to perform the instant stone construction in a state without obtaining permission from the Defendant in the court of the lower court; and (c) even if the Defendant was not clearly directed as C’s testimony, the Defendant was aware of the fact that C, who had concluded a contract with his wife and carried out various development activities on a residential premises under the name of his wife, was aware of the fact that C was to carry out the instant stone construction without obtaining permission for development activities; or (d) he was prevented, or