logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2016.10.14 2016노859
산지관리법위반
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as a new map of inspection D located in N, by mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, or violation of the rules of evidence, he stored a stone shed in the vicinity of D in order to prevent any disaster caused by landslides.

Article 12(3)1 and Article 4(1)1 (b)8 of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act) of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act (Restriction on Activities in Conservation Mountainous Districts) 2 (excluding restricted areas for conversion or temporary use of mountainous districts) 2. Mountainous Districts for public interest (excluding restricted areas for conversion or temporary use of mountainous districts)

(3) Notwithstanding paragraph (2), mountainous districts for public interest (excluding restricted areas for conversion or temporary use of mountainous districts) shall not be converted or temporarily used:

The relevant Acts shall apply to restrictions on activities in any of the following mountainous districts, respectively: 1. Article 4 (Classification of Mountainous Districts) (1) of the mountainous districts referred to in Article 4 (1) 1 (b) (iv) through ( XIV) of the Act shall be classified as follows:

B. Mountainous districts for public interest: Mountainous districts necessary for public interest functions, such as preventing disasters, protecting water sources, conserving natural ecosystems, preserving natural scenery, preserving natural scenery, and promoting national health and recreation with forestry production, which are designated by the Administrator of the Korea Forest Service as follows: Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones, other than Mountainous Districts, according to the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones (hereinafter referred to as “Development Restriction Zones Act”)

The defendant's act constitutes a report under Article 12 (3) of the Development Restriction Zone Act and Article 19 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act and is subject to an administrative fine.

arrow