The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below accepted the defendant's assertion that the defendant fells the bamboo trees from 8.6576 cubic meters in total in the development restriction zone without permission from the competent authority, but found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

(a) No person who outlines the facts charged shall construct a building, alter the purpose of use, install a structure, change the form and quality of land, fell bamboo and trees, divide land, store articles, etc. in a zone subject to development restriction without obtaining permission from the competent authority, and no person shall fell standing timber, extract or gather forest products within a forest without obtaining permission from the competent authority;

Nevertheless, on April 2015, without obtaining permission from the competent authorities, the Defendant cut 8gluss (the cut number of trees 5.1238 cubic meters) and 18glus (the cut number of trees 3.5338 cubic meters) in the forest located in Busan-gun, Busan-gun, which is a development restriction zone, and cut down the bamboo and trees in total 8.6576 cubic meters.

B. The lower court determined that the Defendant’s timbered trees include some of the trees, and that “the bamboo trees” under Article 12(1) of the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones does not include item (g). As such, the instant facts charged constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, acquitted the Defendant pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, deeming that the instant facts charged constituted a case where there is no proof of crime.

(c)

1) In full view of the circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court that violated the Creation and Management of Forest Resources Act, the Defendant is not deemed to fell under the item (g) with the shock of re-ship, but forest roads.