The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The instant structure is a structure that does not require a report under the Building Act, and the lower court erred by misunderstanding that it constitutes a temporary structure and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. This part of the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of fact is that the instant structure does not constitute a temporary building under Article 20 of the Building Act.

Article 20 (3) of the Building Act provides for the obligation of a person who intends to build temporary buildings for the purposes prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as disaster recovery, entertainment, exhibitions, and temporary buildings for construction works, and Article 15 (5) of the Enforcement Decree of the Building Act delegated by him/her list the use of the temporary buildings requiring a report by type.

Of them, subparagraph 8 of Article 8 provides that "containers or similar temporary buildings are used as a temporary office, a temporary warehouse or a temporary lodging establishment."

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the structure of this case constructed by the defendant has the roof and walls of the prefabricated panel structure, with windows and entrance doors installed, and the inside of which can be recognized the fact that remote areas and door boards are enclosed. This constitutes a temporary building similar to a container, and it is necessary to report under the Building Act because it constitutes a temporary building under the above No. 8.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. Even if the Defendant’s judgment on the unfair argument of sentencing considers the circumstances favorable on the grounds of appeal, the lower court appears to have determined the sentence within a reasonable scope by fully taking into account all the circumstances regarding the sentencing.

B. There are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances to change the sentencing of the lower court after the lower judgment.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.