logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 목포지원 2016.02.01 2015고단1719
배타적경제수역에서의외국인어업등에대한주권적권리의행사에관한법률위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 140 million.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 20,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a foreigner of the nationality of the People's Republic of China, and is a captain of Sungyang-gu P ( approximately 90 tons, river ships, and seven persons on board) of the People's Republic of China of the People's Republic of China.

If a foreigner intends to conduct fishery activities in an exclusive economic zone of the Republic of Korea other than a specified prohibited zone, he/she shall obtain permission for each vessel from the Minister of Oceans and Fisheries.

Nevertheless, at around 16:01 on December 12, 201, the Defendant carried out a fishery activity with approximately KRW 72 nautical miles (2.3 nautical miles on North Korea, east 124-06 east, east 124-04, and 2.3 nautical miles on the part of EZ) of the air emitting gear, without obtaining the aforementioned permission. Around 16:01, the Defendant carried out a fishery activity with approximately 1,200 fishing gear ( approximately 13,00 meters in length to reduce the connection of fishing gear).

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Police seizure records and list of seizure;

1. Location map of capture;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing evidence photographs;

1. Subparagraph 1 of Article 17 and Article 5 (1) of the Act on the Exercise of Sovereign Rights on Foreigners' Fishing, etc. in Exclusive Economic Zone for Criminal Facts;

1. Articles 70(1), 70(2), and 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The main sentence of Article 21 of the Act on the Exercise of Sovereign Rights on Foreigners' Fishing, etc. in Exclusive Economic Zone for Confiscation;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;

1. The sentencing under the proviso of Article 69(1) of the Criminal Act of the custody order is to determine the amount of fine as ordered by comprehensively taking account of the following factors: (a) the accused’s mistake and reflects his fault; (b) the accused has no record of criminal punishment in the Republic of Korea; (c) the accused has not captured fishery products; and (d) the scale, operating method,

arrow