수산업법위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A Imprisonment for six months, Defendant B and C shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months.
(b).
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendants’ act of asserting that the portion of the fishery without obtaining permission does not constitute an inshore fishery subject to permission under Article 41(1) of the Fisheries Act. Thus, the Defendants’ act does not constitute a violation of Article 97(1)2 of the Fisheries Act.
Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on this part of the facts charged.
B. Article 66 of the Fisheries Act, which provides that "no person shall capture, gather or cultivate marine animals and plants by any method other than a fishery business under the Fisheries Act or the Fishery Resources Management Act" shall be allowed to take or cultivate marine animals and plants by any method other than the fishery business under the Fisheries Act or the Fishery Resources Management Act, goes against the principle of clarity, and a punishment based on such reasoning is unreasonable because there
(1) The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles in the judgment below which found the defendant guilty on the ground that the pertinent provision of the law is null and void in violation of the principle of no punishment without law, and this part of the facts charged is not a crime).
The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendants (two years of suspended sentence on the defendant A, two years of suspended sentence, one year of suspended sentence on the defendant B, and one year of imprisonment on the defendant A) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. With respect to the portion of fishery activities without obtaining permission (violation of Article 97(1)2 of the Fisheries Act), no one shall operate inshore fishery business without obtaining permission from the Minister of Oceans and Fisheries. The Defendants are in charge of driving of a non-registered vessel and are in charge of driving of a non-registered vessel and other E (E) except the instant case’s death (hereinafter “E”).
Defendant B is in charge of the operation and diving of the above vessel, and the distribution of profits and losses of the recovered sea ginseng, Defendant A is in charge of the operation and diving of the above vessel, Defendant A is in charge of the diving, and Defendant A collected sea ginseng on the sea without obtaining permission.