However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

A person who intends to occupy and use a river by constructing a structure in a river area shall obtain permission from the competent administrative agency.

Nevertheless, the Defendant installed a bridge (20 meters in length, 1 meters in width, 1.3 meters in height), flat, and water bridge facilities without permission from the head of the complete-gun in order to facilitate the access to the entrance of “C” restaurant operated by himself/herself in the former North west-gun, the river area of Taecheon-gun, which is a local river in around 2005, and occupied the river without permission from around that time until August 4, 2016.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Written statements of D;

1. The application of the location map and photographs, and the application of photographic Acts and subordinate statutes to the status of tort;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 95 subparagraph 5 and 33 (1) 3 of the River Act, the selection of punishment for a crime;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (Consideration of favorable circumstances among the following grounds for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Social Service Order is the circumstance favorable to the defendant, including the fact that the defendant acknowledged the criminal facts of this case, and that there is no other criminal punishment than the defendant is sentenced to a fine once.

However, in order for the defendant to facilitate the access of the defendant's restaurant operation without obtaining permission from the competent authorities, the construction of railroad systems bridges and cafeterias for the operation of the defendant's cafeterias does not seem to be less and less than the content and degree of the violation, and about about 11 years since 2005.

B. On December 23, 2014, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 2,00,000,000, to a fine of KRW 2,000,000 on the ground that the Defendant operated the said “C” restaurant without reporting to the competent authorities (this Court approximately approximately 8249), but committed the instant crime.

This point is difficult to obtain the relevant permission due to the legislative intent of the River Act for the purpose of proper management of the river even if the defendant's living is considered.