Even though the Defendant received an order to reinstate the above act from the head of Gwanak-gu Office as of November 16, 2017 to December 10, 2017, the Defendant did not comply with the above order to take measures without justifiable grounds.

2. As to the above facts charged, the public prosecutor did not stipulate Article 56 in the applicable provisions of Articles 142, 133(1)5, and 56 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”), but Article 133(1)5 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act provides that “a person who conducts development activities without obtaining permission for development activities or permission for alteration pursuant to Article 56” (Article 56). A public prosecution was instituted by applying the same.

Article 56 (1) 5 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act provides that "the act of piling up goods for at least one month in a green belt area, control area, or natural environment conservation area" shall be subject to permission from the competent authority for development activities, and where development activities are performed without such permission for development activities, it shall be subject to an order to take measures pursuant to Article 133 (1) 5 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act. The evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to deem that the land on which the defendant dedicated clothes belongs to a green area, control area,

(3) In conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of a crime and thus, a judgment of innocence is rendered in accordance with the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act.