logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.01.31 2017노2355
공무집행방해등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds for appeal are examined as follows: misunderstanding the substance of the grounds for appeal; misunderstanding the legal principles;

In the light of the opposing interpretation of Article 6 of the Enforcement Rule of the Fishery Resources Management Act, any person who has engaged in fishing may capture and gather fishery resources using scoober equipment in divings, in order to determine the misunderstanding of facts and the misunderstanding of legal principles.

Since Daber captured and collected scoo equipment, etc., scoo equipment, etc., the crime of this case does not constitute illegal diving fishery (a method of diving by receiving air through Daber installed air).

Defendant leased E to B, and did not take part in collecting sea ginseng using it.

Judgment

Article 97 (1) 4 of the Fisheries Act provides that "any person who captures, gathers or cultivates marine animals or plants in violation of Article 66" shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than three years or by a fine not exceeding 30 million won, and Article 66 of the same Act shall not apply to any person who captures, gathers or cultivates marine animals or plants by any means other than fisheries under this Act or the Fishery Resources Management Act.

Article 41(3) of the same Act provides that a person who intends to operate a demarcated fishery business shall obtain permission from the head of a Si/Gun/Gu for each fishing vessel, fishing gear, or facility.

Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the following facts are acknowledged: (a) on May 1, 2017, B obtained permission for combined coastal fisheries from the members of the Gyeongnam-do Coastal Sea; (b) on May 24, 2017, the Defendant obtained permission for combined coastal fisheries and (c) on May 24, 2017, and (d) obtained permission for combined coastal fisheries from the Gyeongnam-do Coastal Sea; (b) the Defendant or B exceeded the scope of fisheries permitted by using scoo equipment; (c) the Defendant or B engaged in fisheries other than those under the law of fisheries; and (d) the act of catching and gathering fishery resources using scoo equipment exceeds the scope of fisheries permitted by the fishery.

arrow