The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is MDF room, which is an ancillary facility for commercial buildings, so the Housing Act does not apply, and since the main body that allows the defendant to use MDF room is a commercial building management body, the defendant is excluded from punishment. The defendant merely leased this part and used it as an office, and there was no separate change in the purpose of use.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below, based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, provides that Article 91 of the Housing Act shall apply to cases where the Housing Act was partially amended by Act No. 8383 on April 20, 207, and Article 43(1) shall apply to cases where non-housing facilities and housing are constructed as the same building for the systematic management of multi-family housing in the form of a main complex building, including "multi-family housing" in cases where non-family housing facilities and housing are constructed as the same building after obtaining a construction permit under Article 11 of the Housing Act, but it shall not be deemed "multi-family housing" in cases where facilities other than housing are sold to the general public among welfare facilities. Since MDF offices of this case do not fall under common areas of facilities sold to the general public, Article 91 of the Housing Act applies to the head of the local government, and Article 91 of the Housing Act provides that the head of the local government may suspend the construction work, or order the restoration to the original state, and Article 213 of the head of Busan Housing Act provides that "the lessee shall be punished."