beta
(영문) 청주지방법원 2017.10.26. 선고 2017노556 판결

국토의계획및이용에관한법률위반

Cases

2017No556 Violation of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act

Defendant

A

Appellant

Defendant

Prosecutor

He/she shall hold a public trial on the Dong-dong and the peripheral order of the court.

Defense Counsel

Law Firm B, Attorney C

The judgment below

Cheongju District Court Decision 2016Ma386 decided April 25, 2017

Imposition of Judgment

October 26, 2017

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

When the defendant fails to pay the above fine, the defendant shall be confined in the old house for the period calculated by converting 100,000 won into one day.

The defendant shall be ordered to pay an amount equivalent to the above fine by provisional payment.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for four months, one year of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

The circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant are as follows. The Defendant denied the instant crime up to the lower court’s judgment. The area of land where the Defendant illegally altered the form and quality is larger.

The circumstances favorable to the Defendant are as follows. The Defendant recognized the instant crime for the first time in the trial, and is against the law. The Defendant was in the trial, and the entire land that was unlawfully altered in form and quality was restored to the original state. The Defendant is a primary offender who has no record of punishment. The Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime in the course of raising farmland for cultivation.

In addition to the above circumstances, taking into account the character, conduct, career, environment, background and consequence of the crime and all of the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the appeal by the defendant is justified, and the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is decided again as follows.

【Discretionary Judgment】

Criminal facts and summary of evidence

The summary of the facts constituting the crime recognized by this court and the summary of the evidence is as shown in the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, except for adding "1. The defendant's oral statement at the court below" to the summary of the evidence, so they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 140 Subparag. 1 and Article 56(1) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act; the selection of fines

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Reasons for sentencing

The sentence shall be determined as per the order in consideration of the various circumstances as seen above.

Judges

Judge 50,000

Judge Bo Il-young

Judges Hy-su