If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

A person who intends to divert a mountainous district shall obtain permission from the competent authority to determine its use, as prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Nevertheless, in May 2016, the Defendant, without obtaining permission from the competent authorities, destroyed forests and fields equivalent to a total of 366 square meters by removing sublim trees that he/she born in the country using Pokes and cutting down forests and fields, with the aim of creating a farm road to enter the farmland in Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si, in order to create a farm road to enter the farmland.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Investigation reports (on-site verification), investigation reports (verification of the owner of the damaged area), investigation reports (collection of satellite photographs and photographs);

1. The degree of damaged area [the above land constitutes “a mountainous district” under the Mountainous Districts Management Act as a land where standing timber is growing according to each of the above evidence.

As to this, the Defendant asserts that the above land is a “farmland”, which is an orchard where sublime trees are planted, and is excluded from “a mountainous district” as prescribed by the Mountainous Districts Management Act.

In a systematic interpretation of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes as stated in the separate sheet, where a person fails to obtain permission to divert a mountainous district under the Management of Mountainous Districts Act (including permission, approval, etc. to be deemed permission to divert a mountainous district under other Acts) with respect to land, the legal category of which is forest land used for cultivating lost trees for at least two years, such land shall not fall under “farmland” under Article 2(1)(a) of the Farmland Act.

In that sense, the land category is “gym” and multiple trees were planted on the land above as it did not obtain a permit for conversion of mountainous district or a permit for conversion of mountainous district which is deemed to have been granted.

Even if it is not considered as farmland, it shall not be considered as “farmland.”

Therefore, we cannot accept the above argument of the defendant - the law.

1. Article 53 subparagraph 1 of the Management of the Mountainous Districts Act and Articles 14 (1) of the same Act concerning facts constituting an offense;