except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The defendant is a person responsible for the construction site of the garage site in Gyeonggi-do, B forest and C forest which is conducted with permission for development deemed permission for conversion of a mountainous district for 23,512 square meters.

On July 1, 2018, from around August 1, 2018 to August 31, 2018, the Defendant, while not obtaining permission to alter a mountainous district conversion, took steps to cut earth and rocks, using a cutter on the part of 2,712 square meters outside the previously permitted area on the ground of the said B forest and land, and additionally removed earth and rocks equivalent to 43,107 cubic meters exceeding the permitted soil and rocks (65,210 cubic meters).

Accordingly, the Defendant changed the form and quality of mountainous districts other than preserved mountainous districts and collected earth and rocks without permission.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. Article 53 subparagraph 1 of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act, subparagraph 1 of Article 53, Article 14 (1) of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act, subparagraph 4 of Article 53, and Article 28 (3) of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act, the selection of imprisonment for each crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (limited to concurrent crimes with punishment prescribed for a violation of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act due to a conversion of a mountainous district with heavy penalty)

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act refers to a situation unfavorable to the defendant, where the defendant illegally changed the form and quality of a mountainous district beyond the permitted scope and collected soil and rocks. In light of the area of the change of the form and quality, the degree of damage to a mountainous district, the amount of earth and rocks collected, etc., the crime of this case is not less complicated. The defendant was sentenced to a fine on one occasion for the same kind of crime, and the crime of violating the Wastes Control Act, which illegally incinerated wastes, also committed an environmental crime,

However, the defendant has consistently recognized his/her crime and is against himself/herself, and the permission for development is granted within the area.