When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The defendant is a foreigner of the nationality of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as "China"), who is a captain of "C" (38 tons, steel) (hereinafter referred to as "C"), a vessel of single-trade fishing for the loading of tin in China.

Where any foreigner intends to conduct fishery activities in an exclusive economic zone other than a specific prohibited zone, he/she shall obtain permission therefor from the Minister of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries.

Nevertheless, from around 04:00 on October 18, 2013 to 06:55 on the same day, the Defendant captured 70 nautical miles (32.34 00 east latitude, 125.02 east longitude, 33 nautical miles on the side of the EZ of the Republic of Korea) and approximately 73 nautical miles (3 nautical miles on the southwest of the southwest of the latitude, 40 east longitude, 125 02 45 east longitude, and 1.5 nautical miles on the side of the EZ of the Republic of Korea) from the southwest of the latitude of Jeju.

Accordingly, the defendant conducted fishery activities in the exclusive economic zone of the Republic of Korea without obtaining permission from the Minister of Oceans and Fisheries.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Written statements of D;

1. A report on the detection of E and a report on the result of boarding;

1. Notarial photographs, anti-port drawings;

1. Records of seizure, list of seizure, and photographs of seized articles;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (for Chinese fishing vessels C's tonnage);

1. Subparagraph 1 of Article 17 and Article 5 (1) of the Act on the Exercise of Sovereign Rights on Foreigners' Fishing, etc. within the relevant legal framework on criminal facts;

2. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse.

3. Article 21 of the Act on the Exercise of Sovereign Rights on Foreigners' Fishing, etc. within the confiscation exclusive economic zone, Article 132 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

4. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

5. The crime of this case committed by the Defendant for the reason of sentencing under the proviso of Article 69(1) of the Criminal Act of the custody order would undermine the proper preservation and management order of the fishery resources of the Republic of Korea, enhance the high risk of the fishery resources, and cause huge damage to a large number of Korean fishermen who are working for overlapped environments in difficult circumstances.