logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2015.06.17 2014노2516
개발제한구역의지정및관리에관한특별조치법위반
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Since a person engaged in development activities, such as flatizing work in Guri-si D and E forest (hereinafter “instant forest”) which is the main point of the grounds for appeal, is not the defendant but C, the judgment of the court below that otherwise determined is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the Prosecutor filed an application to amend the Bill of Indictment with the effect that “Article 37 and Article 39 of the Criminal Act” was added to the applicable provisions of the indictment in the case of a trial, “The Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for larceny at the Jung-gu District Court on February 13, 2015 and the judgment became final and conclusive on February 24, 2015,” “The Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for larceny at the Jung-gu District Court on February 13, 2015,” and the judgment of the lower court cannot be maintained any further because the judgment

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, so it will be examined.

3. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, such as the witness C’s statement in the court below as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, namely, C leased the forest of this case from J, the owner of the forest of this case, and was punished five times by a fine, and was sentenced to imprisonment on one occasion without the permission of the competent authority, as in the instant crime, and continued to seek ways to develop the forest of this case. On February 2013, C received a proposal from the Defendant that “it is possible to develop the forest of this case as a horse training site,” and issued a certificate of seal impression to submit relevant documents. C was present at the court of the court below to build the forest of this case as a witness and developed the forest of this case on April 2013, and thereafter, the Defendant arranged surrounding the forest of this case with the soil, and conducted further duplicating work.

[Attachment].]

arrow