(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.11.14 2017노3498 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.11.14 2017노3498

개발제한구역의지정및관리에관한특별조치법위반

Text

The judgment below

Part of acquittal shall be reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The court below found the Defendant guilty on the violation of the Special Measures Act regarding the designation and management of the development restriction zone due to the alteration of the purpose of use of a building among the facts charged in the instant case, and on the violation of the Special Measures Act concerning the designation and management of the development restriction zone due to the habitual violation of the corrective order.

Accordingly, only the prosecutor appealed against the acquittal portion of the judgment of the court below, and since the defendant and the prosecutor did not appeal the conviction portion, the conviction portion of the judgment of the court below became separate and conclusive, the scope of the judgment of the court below is limited to the portion which the court below acquitted

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: at the time of purchasing the land B in Gwangju Northern-gu, the Defendant: (a) there was a conspiracy in the alteration of the purpose of use of C by continuously leasing the said land, even though he was well aware of the fact that C had used the said land as a vinyl; and (b) there was an error of misunderstanding of the facts and misunderstanding of the legal principles regarding the part of

3. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal, the prosecutor applied for amendments to the indictment with respect to the portion not guilty in the judgment of the court below, as stated in Paragraph 1 of the judgment of the court below, which read the facts charged as follows, in the judgment of the court below. Since this court permitted this, the part not guilty in the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

4. In conclusion, the above part shall be reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following decision shall be rendered after pleading, on the ground that there is a ground for ex officio reversal among the judgment below's acquittal.

[Judgment to be used again]

1. The Defendant is the owner of land B in Gwangju Northern-gu, and C constructs a vinyl house on the land.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2017.03.22 2017노213

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.05.30 2016고정960

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.07.06 2016고정927

-창원지방법원 2017.01.13 2016고단1082

-부산지방법원 2017.09.01 2016노5037