The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to D’s statement of the gist of the grounds for appeal, it can be acknowledged that the Defendant ordered D to extend the building of this case after removing the existing building. Thus, even though the Defendant did not directly perform the extended building, he/she can recognize the Defendant’s control over the extension of the building of this case.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact-finding, which found the Defendant not guilty of the instant facts charged.

2. Determination A. On April 5, 2016, the Defendant, without reporting to the competent authority, had D, a lessee, extend the size of 19 square meters for a prefabricated panel in order to use it as a restaurant’s main storage facility in Yansan-gu, Jeonju-si, Jeonju-si, to use it as a restaurant’s main storage facility.

B. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted by the lower court, the lower court determined that the Defendant had D extend the building of this case only by the evidence submitted by the prosecutor.

The lower court acquitted the instant charges on the ground that it was insufficient to view it.

(1) The prosecutor first extended the prefabricated-type panel 19 square meters (hereinafter “the instant building”) to the building located in Masan-gu, Seoul-si, Seoul-si (hereinafter “the instant building”).

Public prosecution was instituted with ‘the content'.

However, when the defendant denies the police protocol of interrogation of the suspect in the court below and there is no evidence to prove the facts charged, the prosecutor changed the facts charged that the defendant allowed the lessee D to extend the building without making a report as stated in the above A at the fourth trial date of the court below.

(2) D appears to have received the understanding of the Defendant who is the owner of the building in the process of removing the building at his own expense after being reported two times as the building of this case.

However, the relationship between the defendant and D or after this case.