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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who resides in Seopopo City C, and is the actual owner of D 9,054 square meters in the same city.

Any person who intends to change the present state of an area where buried cultural heritage is already verified or excavated shall obtain permission from the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration.

Nevertheless, the defendant from May 2016 to the same year.

6. From the end of 17th day, in Seopopopo City D, an area where buried cultural heritage remains, removed miscellaneous trees and swimmings, etc. that grow in the land using heavy equipment such as digging machines, etc. for the purpose of farming houses, and opened a drainage channel so that water generated in the land can be discharged externally, and changed the current state of 126.98 square meters in an area where buried cultural heritage remains in the area where buried cultural heritage is buried, by making it possible to exhaust outside the land.

Accordingly, the defendant changed the present state of the area where buried cultural properties exist without obtaining permission from the Administrator of the Cultural Properties Office.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Results of on-site inspections by this court;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Each police statement made to E, F, and G;

1. A written accusation;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Guidance on the distribution of buried cultural properties;

1. Application of statutes on land register and a certified copy of cadastral map;

1. Article 31 (2) of the Act on the Protection and Investigation of Cultural Properties under the relevant Criminal Records;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Reasons for conviction under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act against the order of provisional payment;

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted: ① the Defendant and his defense counsel cannot be deemed as the alteration of the current state of the area where buried cultural properties exist, which is prohibited by the Act on the Protection and Investigation of Burial Cultural Properties; ② even if the alteration of the current state was committed, the Defendant did not know the existence of the area where buried cultural properties exist in the instant land, and there was no perception or intention to change the existing area of buried cultural properties.

The argument is asserted.

2. Determination: