Nevertheless, the Defendant, without obtaining permission from the competent authority on March 201, performed banking and stop work on the area of 3,343 square meters of the Seosung-si C, D, E farmland, and used it as a site on the water and changed the form and quality of the land.

2. Although the defendant used each of the lands of this case as a site on the water surface, the defendant asserts that each of the lands of this case had already been cut or suspended before the defendant was used, and that there was no fact that the defendant directly cut or suspended the ground.

3. The pattern in which “diverting farmland” as referred to in Article 2 subparag. 7 of the Farmland Act is considered as follows: (a) where not only the form and quality of farmland but also the form and quality of farmland are changed in fact by cutting, embankinging or suspending farmland, or installing tangible objects that may obstruct the use of farmland, etc. but also make it difficult to restore the farmland to its original state; (b) where the farmland is used for other purposes under the circumstances in which it is difficult to restore to its original state, even if it does not result in changes in external form or changes in external form, or even if it involves changes in external form

In the case of the former, if the land in question loses its function as farmland by itself due to the act of farmland diversion and thereafter uses the land for purposes other than agricultural production, etc. no longer constitute “dition of farmland,” the act of diversion of farmland without permission shall be deemed to be an immediate crime established upon the completion of such act and simultaneously completed.