A. In light of the legal principles, the Defendant: (a) executed construction work to create a site for the part where permission for the diversion of forest land was obtained as stated in the facts charged in the instant case (hereinafter “the instant forest”); and (b) destroyed pine trees and forest trees planted therein (hereinafter “the instant tree”) so as to be used as landscape trees; (c) extracted small number of pine trees already planted therein at the passage through which they were used when the instant forest was a stock farm site; and (d) restored them again after the completion of the instant construction; and (e) the Defendant’s act is merely “temporary use” as stipulated in the Mountainous Districts Management Act; and (e) even if the said act constitutes “the diversion of a mountainous district”, this constitutes a justifiable act that does not go against social rules, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles that found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence (1.5 million won of a fine) imposed on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine the misapprehension of the legal principle’s assertion. In other words, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below: (a) the Defendant removed pine trees that were in part of the forest land of this case and planted the trees of this case in that part; and (b) the fact that the situation where the instant work was opened by using heavy equipment in the forest damaged area from the forest damaged area was clearly confirmed; and (c) the Hongcheon-gun regional green belt guard D, which investigated the actual situation of the instant forest land after the instant crime, was left unattended in the court of original judgment when conducting a field investigation in the forest land of this case.