The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court rejected the allegation in the grounds of appeal as to mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles that the instant facilities constitute subject to permission under the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal alleging misconception of facts due to the violation of the rules of evidence is merely a dispute over the fact-finding of the court below in accordance with the legal principles of the free evaluation of evidence, and the reasons alleged in the grounds of appeal are examined in light of the evidence duly admitted, and there were no errors of exceeding the bounds of the free evaluation of evidence, or of misapprehending

In addition, the argument that the defendant's act constitutes a mistake in the law under Article 16 of the Criminal Act is not a legitimate ground for appeal, as it is alleged in the ground of appeal that the defendant's act is not subject to judgment ex officio.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.