beta
(영문) 대법원 2015.03.12 2013도10544

농지법위반

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Jeonju District Court Panel Division.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is as follows: ① Defendant A, the representative director of the Defendant Company (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) used farmland for another purpose without obtaining permission for temporary use of farmland for another purpose without obtaining permission for temporary use of farmland for another purpose, and ② Defendant A, the representative director of the Defendant Company B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) used farmland for another purpose without obtaining permission for temporary use of farmland for the Defendant Company’s business without obtaining the above temporary use of farmland for another purpose, in order to manage a 7,766 square meters in a total of 8 lots, including 6,104 square meters, from June 1, 201 to July 2012, 201, for a total of 7,766 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

2. On this premise, the court below affirmed the judgment of the court of first instance which acquitted the Defendants on the ground that the land in this case constitutes farmland under the Farmland Act, regardless of its land category on the public register, should be considered according to the actual condition of the land in question, and that it does not constitute farmland under the Farmland Act in light of the actual condition, since Defendant A used the land in this case to the site of access roads, breaking and managing offices, etc. (hereinafter “facilities in this case”) with permission for temporary use under the name of the Defendant Company, the land in this case does not constitute farmland under the Farmland Act, and therefore, Defendant A continued to occupy and use the land in this case as the site of the above facilities after the expiration of the period of temporary use permit, even if it is used,

3. However, the lower court’s determination is difficult to accept for the following reasons.

Whether certain land falls under farmland provided for in subparagraph 1 of Article 2 of the Farmland Act shall be classified by the land category in the public register.