Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

A person who intends to temporarily use a mountainous district for the purposes, such as forest roads, work roads, forest products transportation roads, forest paths, such as mountain trails, forest paths, or other similar mountain paths, shall report thereon to the competent authority.

On April 2015, the Defendant, without reporting to the competent authority, made a total of 1,00 square meters working route of 1,00 square meters on forest land, such as the voice group C, etc., and converted the mountainous district into a mountainous district by using a digging season, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the witness D in the third public trial records;

1. A investigation report and a report on actual condition;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to forest register;

1. Article 55 subparagraph 2 of the relevant Act on the facts constituting an offense and Articles 15-2 and 15-2 (2) of the Management of the Mountainous Districts which are the option of punishment.

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

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant's involvement in the defendant's work is not set up a work since he purchased Poskk sk sk sk sk sk sk sk sk sk sk sk sksk sksk

However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, the defendant, as co-owner of the forest of this case, sold kump trees on the land of this case to E, and was aware that E was aware that kump trees were cut out by using kump ske, and the defendant had experience of opening a work to cut trees and transport them before.

According to the above facts, the defendant was aware that E establishes work paths on the land of the forest of this case in order to excavate straw trees, and at least impliedly consented thereto.

It is reasonable to view it.

In addition, even if the evidence of this case and the defendant's assertion are based on the evidence of this case and the defendant's assertion, the defendant is