logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원남원지원 2020.08.11 2020고정10
산지관리법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,500,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Any person who intends to convert a mountainous district shall obtain permission from the Minister of the Korea Forest Service, etc. according to classification of mountainous district types, areas, etc. for a specified purpose.

On July 2019 through August 8, 2019, the Defendant: (a) removed miscellaneous trees without obtaining permission for mountainous district conversion from the Namwon-si, Namwon-si, the competent authority; (b) cut and filled up heavy equipment; and (c) stored embankments, etc.; and (d) diverted mountainous district.

Summary of Evidence

1. Court statement of the defendant (the second trial date);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the fact that the survey report on actual condition, location map of illegally damaged forest land, illegal forest damage warning photographs, the current status of survey of illegally damaged forest land, the details of calculation of damage amount, and the fact that B has been designated as quasi-preserved mountainous district at South Won;

1. Article 53 subparagraph 1 of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act and the main sentence of Article 14 (1) of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act and selection of fines for criminal facts;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

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

1. The scope of punishment by law: Fines of 50,000 to 30 million won; and

2. Determination of sentence: An act of converting a fine of KRW 2.5 million into a mountainous district without permission shall cause social loss by damaging a forest that is a serious cause and requires considerable time and expenses for restoration to the original state. Therefore, it is necessary to prevent such act through appropriate punishment.

Even though the defendant had been punished twice for the same crime, the defendant committed the crime of this case.

However, considering the circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant's mistake is recognized, the defendant was engaged in drainage work upon the request of the neighboring land owner, and there are some circumstances to consider the motive of the crime, and the fact that the area of the mountainous district unlawfully used is very wide, etc., the defendant's age, environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the punishment as ordered shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the various factors of sentencing specified in the arguments

arrow