The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (the imprisonment of six months, the suspension of execution of two years, the fine of ten million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of court-oriented trials and the principle of direct determination, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The defendant shows an attitude to recognize and reflect the crime in this case. The defendant has no history of criminal punishment except for those who have been sentenced one time to a fine for a crime in this case, since the defendant performed restoration work after the instant case, and obtained confirmation of completion of restoration from the Jeju market on January 17, 2017, while considering the aforementioned circumstances, it is difficult for the court below to determine the punishment for the defendant, in view of the fact that there is no change in circumstances that the court below determined the punishment for the defendant, after considering the aforementioned circumstances, no change in circumstances exists in the scope of punishment for the defendant's act in this case, such as the restoration of forest once it was destroyed, or need to protect the environment of the mountainous district.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.