산지관리법위반등
All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.
1. As to the summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the lower court (i.e., six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, etc.), the Defendant asserts that the prosecutor is too unfasible and unfair.
2. The following facts are the circumstances favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects the mistake thereof; (b) there was no past record of criminal punishment heavier than the fine; and (c) the fact that the Defendant obtained authorization of the forest management plan regarding the deforestation of Class 1 of the crime of the lower judgment.
On the other hand, the crime of this case is a normal situation unfavorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant temporarily used the mountainous district without permission and cut standing timber without permission, and that there was a record of criminal punishment of fines due to the violation of the Special Act on the Prevention of Cirrative Disease of Trees in 2015, the area of the mountainous district which was temporarily used without permission is equivalent to 890 square meters, and the number of the cut standing timber is equal to 1,395, and there was no damage to forest resources due to the crime of this case, and most of the diverted mountainous districts have not been restored to its original state.
In full view of the aforementioned circumstances and other factors of sentencing, including the background of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, and environment, etc., as seen above, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant and the Prosecutor’s assertion are without merit.
3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.