logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.08.30 2017고정1199
건축법위반
Text

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant owned and managed a building of one story, four stories above ground, and a total floor area of 516.77 square meters located in Daejeon (hereinafter “instant building”) from December 27, 2012 to May 30, 2016.

Any person who intends to change the use of buildings corresponding to the group of business facilities, such as accommodation facilities, into the purpose corresponding to the group of residential business facilities, such as multi-family houses, shall report it to the competent

Nevertheless, on April 5, 2012, from around May 30, 2016 to around May 30, 2016, the Defendant used the building of this case 124.00 square meters on the second floor of the instant building, which was approved to be used for accommodation facilities (norries), for one’s own residential purpose, and changed the purpose of the building of this case, which was an accommodation facility into a multi-family house without reporting to the competent authority, such as leasing it to C and D, respectively.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness E and F;

1. The witness D’s legal statement (the building of this case was used and resided in a house respectively, and the defendant also used and resided in a house, so it cannot be viewed as a general form of living accommodation.)

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Statement and self-statements made to D police;

1. Construction of the Daejeon G Gu office, on-site photographs of buildings submitted by public officials, reports on the results of business trips, and accusations;

1. General building ledgers, prior notifications, civil petition site photographs, and non-violationed building corrective orders (IIj) [including accommodation business such as Leskins (Article 4 subparag. 1-b. 1-b. of the Enforcement Decree of the Public Health Control Act) and officetels’s use as accommodation facilities after the amendment of the Enforcement Decree of the Public Health Control Act by Presidential Decree No. 23503, Jan. 10, 2012] are opened in the length in which the Defendant can operate as Leskins lawfully. However, according to the records, the Defendant’s records show the following.

arrow