logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 군산지원 2018.08.17 2018고단265
문화재보호법위반
Text

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

Reasons

1. A person who intends to alter the current state of designated cultural heritage (including its protective facilities and protection zone, and dead natural monuments), such as planting or removing trees in the facts charged of the instant case, shall obtain permission from the Commissioner of the Cultural Heritage Administration;

On November 2015, the Defendant: (a) sold approximately 250g of pine trees planted by the Defendant to F, a landscaping business entity; (b) agreed that the Defendant would obtain various permission to extract pine trees; and (c) upon the Defendant’s consent, prepared to take measures to extract pine trees, such as, inter alia, a historic and cultural environment protection zone for Da, which is a State-designated culture; and (d) preparing to perform, inter alia, electric field work for pine trees upon the Defendant’s consent.

However, the Defendant did not obtain permission from the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Office, and had F gather 42 g of trees for landscaping as planted in the above forest from April 21, 2017 to February 25 of the same year.

As a result, the defendant removed trees in the protection zone of the national cultural heritage designated by the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Office without permission, and changed the phenomenon.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant, from the investigative agency to this court, did not instruct the F to excavate or sell planted pine trees on the second parcel of this case, and denied the crime that F arbitrarily extracted pine trees.

B. As to this, the prosecutor, while selling and selling pine trees between the Defendant and F, identified the quantity of pine trees as 250 glus. The pine trees existing in the land subject to sale as stated in the sale contract were over 203 glus. It should include up to 42 gluss in the instant two parcels, which is adjacent to 250 glus, and that the Defendant, from among the instant two parcels, had G, who is the owner of one parcel of the instant two parcels, take away the pine trees by telephone.

The F paid the expenses related to the permission, but all of the licensing process.

arrow