However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On March 7, 2015, the Defendant, at the dry field located in Gyeonggi-si, Gyeonggi-do on March 12:40, 2015, collected knives, etc. in one place with a length of about 10 meters, about 5 meters in width, and about 50 centimeters in height, to catch them.

At the time, there was a period of a forest fire investigation, and there was a close vicinity of D and E (hereinafter “the instant forest”) so there was a duty of care not to set fire or enter with fire in a place adjacent to the forest.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and caused the Defendant to move the fire to a neighboring forest of this case, with the wind of math, by neglecting it.

As a result, the Defendant, by the foregoing negligence, committed approximately KRW 663 trees, including F, G-owned-based-type-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The map of areas damaged by forests;

1. Photographs of damaged areas of forests;

1. A registered investigation report (Investigation of standing timber in a forest damaged area);

1. Reporting on the occurrence of and damage to forest fires;

1. A certificate of all registered matters;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on land use plans;

1. Relevant Article 53 (4) of the Forest Protection Act, the choice of punishment for an offense, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act ( Taking into account the favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing) of the suspended sentence is that the defendant would have been able to prevent the above forest fire if he paid little attention, the unfavorable circumstances such as the fact that the area of the damaged forest was not small, the defendant's view and reflects his criminal act, the fact that the owner of the damaged forest has made monetary compensation and reached an agreement with the owner of the damaged forest, the defendant has no record of being punished for the same kind of crime in the past, and there has been no record of being punished for the crime in the past, and other favorable circumstances such as the defendant's old age, the family environment of the defendant.