All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court (a fine of four million won) is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. Defendant 1) In the course of misunderstanding of facts, the Defendant merely stores a stone set up on the spot while maintaining the existing shape in the course of repairing the ducts and ducts that had been in the past, and does not newly install a stone arbs that had not been in the past, and the Defendant’s act does not constitute construction of a structure that requires permission for development activities. Nevertheless, the lower court convicting the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts, and thus, is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant alleged the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this case, and the lower court, on the grounds of its stated reasoning, determined that the Defendant’s act of stockpiling stone constitutes the installation of a structure subject to permission of development acts, and found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case.

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in comparison with the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is just and acceptable. In so doing, it did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as alleged by the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. In light of the public interest of the relevant laws and regulations regulating the act of development without permission, the Defendant’s act of development is deemed to have been conducted without permission, and there are extenuating circumstances to consider the motive of the act of development in order to improve farmland and prevent soil erosion for the purpose of farming.