Of the facts charged in this case, violation of the Act on Urban Parks, Greenbelts, etc.

A. Article 21(1) of the Act on Urban Parks, Greenbelts, Etc. (hereinafter “Park Green Areas Act”) provides that “any person who promotes a private park may construct and operate any urban park or park facilities with the designation of the implementor of an urban/Gun planning facility project under Article 86(5) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act and the authorization of an implementation plan under Article 88(2) of the same Act, as prescribed by Presidential Decree,” and Article 53 subparag. 1 of the same Act provides that “any person who constructs or manages any urban park or park facilities without entrustment or authorization in violation of the above provisions shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than one year or by a fine not exceeding ten million won.”

B) However, the Defendant does not constitute “private park promoters” under Article 21(1) of the Green Areas Act, and the Defendant installed the instant facilities in the instant park without obtaining authorization from the park management authority, on June 2014, on the grounds that the instant park does not substantially constitute “park facilities” under Article 2 subparag. 4 of the said Act, since the instant park cannot be deemed as urban neighboring parks, the Defendant did not constitute “park facilities” under Article 2 subparag. 4 of the said Act, and the Defendant installed the instant facilities in the instant park without obtaining authorization from the park management authority.

Thus, it cannot be deemed that the construction of park facilities without being entrusted or authorized in violation of Article 21 (1) of the Green Areas Act violates Article 53 subparagraph 1 of the same Act.

2) The lower court’s punishment of KRW 1 (1 million in penalty) is too unreasonable.

B. A summary of the grounds for appeal against the judgment below of the second instance (a violation of the Public Health Control Act).