A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles (1) The Defendant’s act of reclaiming the instant land in order to enhance the productivity of farmland by planting 1,000 square meters out of the instant land, which is a field of sloping mountain field, thereby raising the productivity of farmland and to flatize the place with iron such as a passage part, does not constitute a change or damage to the fundamental function of the instant land, and thus, it does not require the permission of the competent authority.

(2) The Defendant’s act does not constitute a crime in accordance with Article 16 of the Criminal Act, since he/she received a reply from the Eunpyeong-gu Office to the effect that the act of cutting farmland, such as guest soil, embanking, and cutting, is possible without permission, and trusted that changes the form and quality of the instant land.

B. The penalty of the lower judgment on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (three million won by fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, (1) pursuant to Article 56(1)1 of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act (amended by Act No. 10580, Apr. 12, 2011; hereinafter the same) and Article 51 subparag. 3 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the alteration of the form and quality of land for farming can be made without permission of the competent authority. However, “the alteration of the form and quality of land for farming” shall be construed as “the alteration of the form and quality of land for farming” as “the alteration of the form and quality of land for farming” in cases of changing the form and quality of farmland in order to enhance the productivity of farmland, such as the cultivation of crops in the farmland already

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Do4598 Decided May 8, 2008). The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, i.e., the land category of this case is connected to forest land as “former,” and the land category of this case was connected to forest land. Since before the crime of this case was committed, night trees, vegetable trees, etc. were planted on the ground.