Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

B, while managing the wedding ceremony of the trade name “E” in Asan City, on January 1, 2013, the Defendant was a person who acquired the F’s right to operate the wedding hall and operated the said wedding hall on May 2015.

Although anyone could not use or benefit from state property without following the procedures and methods prescribed by the State Property Act or other Acts, the Defendant occupied state-owned land at the above place from January 1, 2018 to January 29, 2019 without obtaining permission for use of state-owned property, and operated a wedding hall.

Accordingly, the Defendant used state property without complying with the procedures and methods prescribed by law.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness G;

1. A written accusation;

1. The current status of the termination of permission for use of the Dware and parking lot State property;

1. Application of all registered matters, entire certificate, on-site photographs statutes;

1. Article 82 of the State Property Act and Articles 82 and 7 (1) of the same Act and the selection of fines concerning criminal facts;

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

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended execution of the law demanded the F, other than the Defendant, to restore to the original state upon the expiration of the permission period, and that the restoration period was extended until November 2018, it was not occupied without permission until the said period.

On the other hand, the above evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court and the following circumstances recognized by the relevant laws and regulations, i.e., the permission to use the State-owned land of this case is terminated upon the expiration of the permission period: Provided, however, it appears that the permission to use the State-owned land of this case can be granted prior to the expiration of the above period, and ii) the permission to extend was not granted due to such reasons as the failure to pay part of the fee within the above permission period