A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, a State-designated cultural heritage-designated cultural heritage-designated cultural heritage-based C, worked as an employee of the “E” corporation, who performed D construction works, and as a person responsible for the said construction site from July 2013.

Any person who intends to change the current state of State-designated cultural heritage shall obtain permission from the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration.

Nevertheless, from April 11, 2016 to April 14, 2016, the Defendant: (a) constructed D construction in the area of “C” located in the racing city; (b) without obtaining permission from the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration; (c) performed construction works of destroying North west and west west with a size of 2 meters, 1.05 meters in depth, 168 meters in length, and 336 square meters in size; and (d) performed construction works of expanding the width of the drainage route from 0.8m to 1.5m in depth, and 0.86m in depth from 0.4m to 0.86m in depth, thereby bringing about a change in topography.

Accordingly, the Defendant changed the present state of State-designated cultural heritage without obtaining permission from the Administrator of Cultural Heritage Administration.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning G;

1. Application of statutes to on-site photographs, the current status of cultural heritage zones, screen pictures of cultural heritage of the Cultural Heritage Administration, architectural drawings permitted, and current status of unauthorized construction works;

1. Article 99 (1) 1 of the Cultural Heritage Protection Act and Article 35 (1) 1 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the selection of punishment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that it is a cultural, historical, and academic value high, and thus, it must be fully preserved and then transferred to descendants;

Nevertheless, without legitimate permission, the Defendant committed an act of changing the present situation, and the area where the present situation was changed is relatively wide.

In this process, some of the relics and relics are deemed damaged.

However, in the case of multiple works, it seems that the defendant started to work by civil petition, only one fine has been imposed on the defendant, and all other circumstances shown in the trial of this case.