logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.07.13 2017고정70
한강수계상수원수질개선및주민지원등에관한법률위반
Text

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

No person shall catch fish on the river section of the main stream of the Han River between the Paldang Dam and the lockwater.

Nevertheless, on August 26, 2016, the Defendant, at around 21:30, engaged in the act of catching fish by installing a “fishing market for a day” at a point of approximately 200 meters away from the head of the Nam-si, Nam-si, the river section of the Han River, the main stream of which is the river section of the Han River, which is the main stream of the Han River.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Written accusation, C’s written statement, a basic plan for river maintenance (Supplement) between one and another, and each related photograph;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries, such as criminal history;

1. Article 30 (2) and Article 6 of the Act on the Improvement of Water Quality and Support for Residents of the Han River Water System, the water supply source and the Act on the Improvement of Resident Support, etc., Article 7 (3) 2 of the Water Supply and Waterworks Installation Act concerning criminal facts and the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;

1. Determination as to the assertion of the defendant and his/her defense counsel under the main sentence of Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the costs of lawsuit

1. Summary of the assertion

A. Article 6 of the Act on the Improvement of Water Quality and Support for Residents of the Han River-System in violation of the principle of clarity (hereinafter “the Han River-System Act”) is an unclear term with which the location cannot be identified, and thus contravenes the principle of clarity of the criminal statutoryism.

B. The Defendant did not know the fact that the instant place was prohibited from engaging in fishing in the middle of the Han River and did not know of the fact that the instant place was prohibited from engaging in fishing in the middle of the Han River. As such, there was no criminal intent in violation of the said Act.

2. Determination

A. The Korean Constitution (Articles 12 and 13) and the Criminal Code (Article 1(1)) stipulate the principle of statutoryity for the crime, and the principle of statutoryity is limited to the crime.

arrow