Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Any person who intends to newly construct, extend, rebuild, rebuild, rebuild, relocate, alter the purpose of use, or remove buildings or other structures within a water source protection area shall obtain permission from the competent authority.

Nevertheless, around September 6, 2017, the Defendant installed a height of about 6 meters, which is a structure, without obtaining permission from the competent authority in Cheongju-si, a water source protection area.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement in the first protocol of trial;

1. Determination on the accusation, on-site photographs, the defendant, and his/her defense counsel's assertion

1. The summary of the argument is that the defendant sought an answer to the public official in charge to the effect that the omission of criminal facts (hereinafter referred to as “in this case”) does not constitute a problem, and therefore, the defendant did not have the awareness of illegality.

2. Determination

A. The Defendants’ assertion is reasonable to deem that the installation of the instant non-establishment is not subject to permission under the Water Supply and Waterworks Installation Act, and that it constitutes a mistake in the land or law.

B. Article 16 of the Criminal Act provides that his act of misunderstanding that his act does not constitute a crime under the law shall not be punishable only when there is a justifiable reason for such misunderstanding. It does not mean a simple site of law, but it is generally accepted that his act constitutes a crime but, in his special circumstances, it does not constitute a crime under the law, and that he shall not be punishable if there is a justifiable reason for such misunderstanding.

(See Supreme Court Decision 91Do1566 delivered on October 11, 1991, etc.). C.

As to the instant case, the following circumstances are acknowledged based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this Court, namely, ① the Defendant was a member of the Cheongju-si B in the instant case.