logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2013.10.01 2013고단1123
골재채취법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be paid.

Reasons

Criminal facts

The Defendant obtained permission to cut and extract aggregate, which is a development act, from February 20, 2012 to November 30, 2012, with approximately 26,928 square meters of eight parcels, such as Kim Jong-si D, etc. and 6.4m from November 20, 2012.

If a person who has obtained permission to extract aggregate intends to change the permitted contents, he/she shall obtain approval from the Kim Jong-si market, and extract aggregate in accordance with the permitted contents, such as the permitted extraction area and extraction period, but the defendant, without obtaining approval of the permitted contents, extracted aggregate from November 30, 2012 to January 11, 2013, and extracted aggregate from 20 meters exceeding 6.4 meters, the permitted cut-off height, without obtaining approval of the permitted contents.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Criminal papers, each criminal investigation report, and evidential materials attached thereto;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a written accusation, illegal on-site aviation and photographs, a copy of the official document requesting the implementation of the conditions of permission, a report on the results of on-site verification (Attachment to a photograph), a official document requesting a disposition of penalty, and a written notification of performance

1. Article 49 subparagraph 5 of the relevant Article of the Aggregate Extraction Act, Article 25 of the same Act concerning criminal facts (a violation of any of the requirements for permission in the sale); subparagraph 6 of Article 49 and Article 26 of the Aggregate Extraction Act (a violation of any of the requirements for permission in the sale);

1. Abnormal concurrence and the choice of a sentence prescribed in Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (the circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the confession of the crime in this case and the violation of depth in the living under confinement, and the completion of restoration to the original state of the aggregate extraction)

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. It is so decided as per Disposition for not less than Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow