beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2013.04.11 2012노3966

국토의계획및이용에관한법률위반

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. The judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case because some of the land approved as a road site was incorporated as a factory site and did not know that it was developed as a factory site, was erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (fine 3 million won) is too unreasonable, even if not, on the other hand, unreasonable.

Judgment

A. In full view of the following circumstances that can be recognized by the lower court’s judgment as to the assertion of mistake of facts and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the trial court and the trial court, namely, ① the part incorporated into a factory site into a factory site is equivalent to five meters wide among the land within eight meters wide approved as a road site; ② the area is not large; ② the Defendant’s sale of ten parcels of land for which permission for development was granted to G on April 6, 2010, the area appears to be an important standard; and thereafter, the part of the land incorporated into a factory site on September 19, 201, transferred to G the same amount to KRW 55 million, it is recognized that the Defendant was sufficiently aware of the fact that a part of the land approved as a road site was incorporated into a factory site and created as a factory site. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts is groundless

B. We examine the argument on unfair sentencing, the defendant did not have any particular criminal power after 191, the defendant completed the restoration to the original state in accordance with the restoration order on the part incorporated into the factory site without obtaining permission for the road site, and paid the administrative fine. However, considering the above circumstances, the court below reduced the fine amount of the summary order (5 million won) in light of the above circumstances, the defendant did not write the portion incorporated into the factory site into the factory site into the factory site 5 meters wide, 90 meters long, and the balanced development of the national land through appropriate management of the land.