All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the fact-misunderstanding and legal principles that there are columns used by the Defendants for warehouses and offices, and that there is a space where the general public is unable to park because the parking line is not opened, the number of parking lots used by the users of the parking lot is not affected by the Defendants’ act, and that there is no damage to the function of the parking lot, the Defendants used the parking lot in violation of the use ratio of the parking lot.

Even though it does not violate the parking law, it is not punishable.

B. The punishment of the lower court (the Defendants: KRW 2 million each of them) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court’s determination as to the assertion of misunderstanding the facts and legal principles reveals the following circumstances, namely, ① Article 2 subparag. 11 of the Parking Lot Act and Article 1-2 subparag. 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, which are acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court: (a) the proportion of the part used as a parking lot in the total floor area of a building exclusively for parking is at least 70%; and (b) Article 29(2) subparag. 1 of the same Act is a penal provision for the use of a parking lot in violation of the aforementioned ratio; (c) the Defendants arbitrarily violate the ratio of the use of a parking lot in the part of the D-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, Sung-nam, the main purpose of which is to exclusively use a car (exclusive parking building) as an office and a warehouse; and (c) according to Articles 12 and 12-2 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, a building exclusively for parking (non-road parking lot), unlike the building-to-land ratio, building area size, and height limit.