Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

A. The Defendant of the charge room is a person who conducts an advertising agency business with the trade name called “C” in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seoul, 301 Dong 1116.

No person shall display or install advertisements, etc. in areas, places or objects prescribed by Presidential Decree in order to preserve scenic landscapes and public morals, prevent harm to the public, and create a healthy and pleasant living environment.

Nevertheless, from August 7, 2017 to September of the same month, the Defendant displayed approximately 6m 7m *0.7m m 'E' advertisements containing the contents of ‘E' on the roadside trees, which are objects prohibited from displaying advertisements, etc. located in Daegu Dong-gu, Daegu from around August 7, 2017, and displayed 113 advertisements in total as shown in the list of crimes in the annexed crime.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A written accusation;

1. Violations photographs;

1. Application of the statutes on the contract for banner production;

1. Article 18 (1) 3 and Article 4 (1) of the Act on the Management of Outdoor Advertising Materials, etc., referred to in the relevant Article concerning facts constituting an offense, and Articles 18 (1) 3 and 4 (1) of the same Act;

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act violates matters concerning the indication, installation, etc. of outdoor advertising materials, thereby undermining the safe and pleasant living environment. In particular, even though there was a history of punishment several times for the same kind of crime, the crime liability is not easy in that it repeatedly committed the crime.

However, the defendant not only removed all the illegal banner of this case, but also has been operated by the defendant around December 7, 2017 as he seriously reflected his mistake.

It takes into account the favorable circumstances such as the closure of C and the repeatedness not to repeat again in the future, and the age, sex, environment, and crime of the defendant.