A The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the above sentence shall be executed for two years from the date of the final judgment.

Defendant

A is a state of ownership of P and 11 parcels in Ansan-si, and Defendant B is a real operator of D.

A person who intends to engage in development activities shall obtain permission for development activities from the competent authority.

Defendant

A requested Defendant B to fill up the above land, and Defendant B, without obtaining permission of the safe market, filled up land of approximately 6,202 square meters between November 10, 2018 and December 30, 2018, on the land of the above 12 parcel of land and approximately 15 cm above it.

Accordingly, Defendants conspired to engage in development activities without obtaining permission for development activities.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant B’s legal statement

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. A written accusation;

1. In light of the purport of Article 56(1)2 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act and Article 51(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act excluding the alteration of the form and quality of land for farming as the land is subject to permission, the alteration of the form and quality of land for farming is deemed to refer to the alteration of the form and quality of farmland in order to enhance productivity of farmland, such as the cultivation of crops in the farmland already developed or the simple cultivation of soil or the small-scale suspension of farmland for the purpose of improving the land productivity, and thus, it is reasonable to interpret that even if the land owner, etc. has filled the land from an intention to cultivate the land, if it naturally reaches the extent that the fundamental function of the land is altered or damaged (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do4598, May 8, 2008).