logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.06.23 2016고정325
농어촌정비법위반
Text

The defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000 (per million), but if the above fine is not paid, KRW 100,000 (per million) shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

In spite of the fact that no one illegally occupies or uses agricultural infrastructure, the Defendant cultivated in March 2007, after planting waste trees and waste trees, which are multi-living crops, into the maintenance of 6,366 square meters in the area of 1,67 square meters, C1,504 square meters, D 3,195 square meters, etc. (the land located inside the bank of a water reservoir).

Accordingly, the defendant illegally occupied and used agricultural infrastructure(maintenance).

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the police accused;

1. Statement protocol to E by the police;

1. Application of statutes on the details of accusation, location map (satellite photographs), field photographs, guidance for the restoration to the original state of agricultural infrastructure (1, 2, final) and unauthorized occupancy of agricultural infrastructure;

1. Article 130 (3) and Article 18 (3) 3 of the same Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. The reason for sentencing of Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, which are recognized by the defendant, is that the defendant is divided in depth with the recognition of the crime.

From the time when the defendant was the first step to maintain this case, it was demanded that the Korea Rural Community Corporation in 2013 should point out the illegal possession and pay the defendant the occupancy charges. Since the accusation of this case, the Special Metropolitan City District Court in 2015 group 52627 group 2015 group 2015 group 52627 group 20 group 2067 group 201 group 201 group 201 group 2066

There is no same criminal history for the defendant.

As above, it is decided as per Disposition by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances leading to the instant case and all the circumstances regarding sentencing.

arrow