1. As to the prosecutor’s grounds of appeal, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment that acquitted the Defendant on the ground that there was no proof of the crime regarding the violation of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act due to nonperformance of an order to take measures on the grounds

According to the records, the above judgment of the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles on the violation of Article 142 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act.

2. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act with respect to the Defendant’s grounds of appeal, an appeal may be filed on the ground that the lower judgment erred by grave mistake of facts has influenced the judgment, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without labor for

Therefore, in this case where a more minor sentence was imposed on the defendant, the argument that the court below erred in finding evidence selection and probative value or finding facts based on it, or that it points out the misapprehension of legal principles based on the facts acknowledged by the court below, cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted by the court below, the court below did not seem to have erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the validity of permission for development activities, intentional act, mistake of law, farmland and the Building Act

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.