국토의계획및이용에관한법률위반등
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence of the court below (the defendant A: six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, 80 hours of community service order, and the defendant B: fine of three million won) is too unreasonable.
2. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, has a unique area for sentencing determination, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.
(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). As a result, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original judgment, and comprehensively taking account of all the reasons for sentencing (in particular, the area of a mountainous district damaged by Defendant A is considerable, and the permission for ex post facto change or reinstatement is not granted) revealed in the proceedings of the instant case, the sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable, thereby exceeding the reasonable scope of discretion.
3. In conclusion, the defendants' appeal is without merit and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.