logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1969. 3. 18. 선고 67도1282 판결
[임산물단속에관한법률위반][집17(1)형,069]
Main Issues

Wooder is not a forest product.

Summary of Judgment

forest products are not forest products.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 1 (2) of the Forestry Products Control Act and Article 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Forestry Products Control Act

Escopics

Defendant 1 and four others

upper and high-ranking persons

Prosecutor

Judgment of the lower court

Jeju District Court Decision 67No132 delivered on September 14, 1967

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds for appeal by the chief prosecutor of the Chuncheon District Public Prosecutor's Office shall be examined.

According to Article 1 (2) of the Forestry Products Control Act, the term "forest products" means (1) wood, wood, (2) growth ground, main place (including dong trees), flood land, water and rock, earth and rocks, (3) and other products prescribed by Cabinet Ordinance produced in forests. Forest products under Article 1 (2) 3 of the Enforcement Decree of the said Act (Ordinance No. 1550 of Sep. 17, 1963) provides that "brus from the manufacturing of reeds, grus, grus, and extracted trees extracted from forests" and it cannot be deemed that the growth ground or the corresponding trees purchased by the defendant do not fall under any of the subparagraphs of Article 1 (2) of the said Forestry Products Control Act, and therefore, it cannot be deemed that the forest products were traded in the forest products under Article 2 of the said Act by making transactions in the grus, therefore, it constitutes grounds for appeal to the prosecutor's appeal.

Therefore, this decision is delivered with the assent of all Justices who participated in accordance with Article 390 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Do-dong Do-won Nababri

arrow