The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Mountainous district damaged by the misunderstanding of the facts and legal principles is about 100 square meters, and is used as dry field after being reclaimed prior to the damage to the mountainous district of this case. In the management office of the Chungcheong State Forest in around 2010, it was already established as a work for cutting standing timber and planting pine trees in the mountainous district of this case, and the Defendant did not convert mountainous district into mountainous district.

Nevertheless, the court below sentenced the defendant guilty, and there is an error of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (three million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The summary of the facts charged in this case is as follows, which the court below sentenced the defendant to a fine of three million won and convicted the defendant.

A person who intends to divert a mountainous district shall obtain permission from the head of the relevant forest office, etc. according to the classification of the types, areas, etc. of the mountainous district prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Nevertheless, on March 2013, the Defendant converted mountainous districts into mountainous districts to have an amount equivalent to KRW 5,101,120 for mountainous district recovery expenses, such as the use of c 1,305 square meters and installation of drainage channels, without obtaining permission to convert mountainous districts in the area of 1,305 square meters in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, the Korea Forest Service, which is a state forest managed by the Korea Forest Service.

B. In the lower court’s determination, the Defendant alleged that the aforementioned facts were erroneous and misapprehension of the legal doctrine as alleged in the grounds of appeal, and the lower court stated in detail as follows, “determination on the Defendant’s and his defense counsel’s assertion” on this issue, and recognized the fact that he diverted the mountainous district as stated in the facts constituting the crime

The decision was determined.

According to each of the above evidence, the area damaged by the Defendant’s use of the instant mountainous district is equal to 1,305 square meters as stated in the facts of the crime.