산업집적활성화및공장설립에관한법률위반
The judgment below
The part against the defendant shall be reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 30,000,000.
Defendant.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal asserts that the punishment sentenced by the court below (two years of suspended sentence in eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The crime of this case, on August 4, 2009, without reporting the completion of the establishment of a factory after the Defendant purchased 8,406 square meters of the factory site in Kimhae-si from Kimhae-si and without reporting the completion of the establishment of a factory, is the case that the Defendant transferred the above factory site to the Korea Industrial Complex Corporation, a management agency for the industrial complex on January 24, 2014. It is recognized that the Defendant’s act is not easy to commit the crime by excluding the legislative intent of the Industrial Cluster Development and Factory Establishment Act, which was prepared to promote industrial clustering and support the smooth establishment of a factory, and even considering the fact that the Defendant paid various expenses, such as capital gains, while selling the above factory site, it is recognized that there is considerable
On the other hand, however, the defendant recognized his mistake and reflects on the fact that the defendant was sentenced to a fine of 300,000 won for the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents in around 1986, and a fine of 50,000 won for the violation of the Road Traffic Act in around 1993, and there is no specific record of criminal punishment until now. The defendant is engaged in business activities in good faith while running the company, and the defendant is sentenced to a fine of a considerable amount of fine and prevents the defendant from holding illegal profits acquired by the defendant is an appropriate punishment that can be imposed on the violator of the above Act. The defendant sold the land for factory without proper knowledge of the relevant laws and regulations for business difficulties and financing of the company. The defendant does not seem to have reached the crime of this case with the intention of obtaining profits from resale from the beginning. It does not seem to have reached the criminal punishment of the defendant for other crime similar to the crime of this case.