The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is true that the Defendant installed a container as described in the facts charged in the instant case. However, the Defendant did not separately report the construction of a temporary building with the knowledge that the sub-lease of the instant container site and the FF Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) or G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) which is a lessee and the lessor have completed the administrative procedures necessary for the installation of containers. Therefore, the Defendant did not have any intention to violate the Building Act due to the failure to report the construction of

2. Reviewing the record of determination, the Defendant knew that F or G completed the administrative procedure relating to the construction of container, which is a temporary building, in the instant site.

or there is no circumstance to deem that there is a justifiable reason to believe that the administrative procedure has been completed and that there is a justifiable reason to believe that it is completed.

(B) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the Defendant’s assertion is not accepted, since G and F entered into a lease agreement on the land and agreed that it is possible to install a container or other facility on that ground. G cannot be found to complete administrative procedures necessary for the installation of a facility, and rather, F bears administrative matters necessary for the use of the leased site as the vehicle storage yard). The lower court found the Defendant guilty of installing a container, a temporary building without any report, as it is justifiable, of the facts charged in the instant case.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.