logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2017.02.03 2016고단3658
하천법위반등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. A person who violates the River Act, a person who violates the State Property Act shall occupy and use land in a river area, occupy and use river facilities, construct, rebuild or alter a structure, excavate, fill up or alter the form and quality of land, excavate land, alter the form and quality of land, collect soil, rocks, sand or gravel, etc. in a river area, and no person shall use or benefit from State property unless he/she complies with the procedures and methods prescribed by Acts, such as the State Property Act

Nevertheless, the Defendant operated a general restaurant in Gyeonggi-si, Gwangju-si, and B, and “C,” from August 2015. On June 25, 2016, the Defendant did not follow the procedures and methods prescribed by the Act, such as obtaining permission from the competent authority or the State Property Act, and installed 50 boxes of 162 square meters on the face of 162 square meters, and installed 1,260 square meters on the face of 1,260 square meters and used it for an outdoor place of business.

Accordingly, the defendant occupied land in the river area without obtaining permission from the competent administrative agency, and used the administrative property without following the procedure and method prescribed by the National Property Act, etc.

2. No person who violates the Road Act may relocate or destroy road appurtenances without any justifiable ground;

Nevertheless, on June 25, 2016, the Defendant removed the protection fences of 1,935 square meters, which are road appurtenances installed between the restaurant operated by the Defendant and the river area indicated in paragraph 1.

Accordingly, the Defendant destroyed the road appurtenances without any justifiable reason.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes in written investigations of offenses, location map and site photographs, general building ledgers, land registers, and written confirmation for land use plans;

1. Article 95 Subparag. 5 of the River Act and Article 33(1) of the same Act (the occupation and use of a river without permission), Articles 82 and 7(1) of the State Property Act (the occupation and use of State property and the occupation and use of profits from State property without permission) concerning criminal facts;

arrow