logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 목포지원 2016.01.26 2015고단1774
배타적경제수역에서의외국인어업등에대한주권적권리의행사에관한법률위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 200,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 200,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a foreigner of Chinese nationality, who is a captain of China's permanent shipment C ( approximately 120 tons, river ships, and 15 persons on board).

A foreigner who intends to conduct fishery activities in the exclusive economic zone of the Republic of Korea shall obtain permission for each vessel from the Minister of Oceans and Fisheries.

Nevertheless, on December 22, 2015, at around 20:00, the Defendant engaged in fishery activities by catching an aquatic animal, such as approximately KRW 4,125 kilograms, using approximately 300 breadth of a promising fishing gear, at the 55.4 nautical miles (or approximately 10 nautical miles on the north, 34-32.8, east, 124-16.2, and EZ) in the west-gun, Yan-gun, the Republic of Korea exclusive economic zone of the Republic of Korea.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to D or E;

1. A protocol of seizure and a list of seizure;

1. A detailed statement of the details of detection, a location map, and a detailed statement of investigation into catches;

1. Application of evidence photographs, measuring evidence-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

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. Article 70(1) and Article 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 the Exclusive Economic Zone for Confiscation and Article 132 (1) of the Criminal Litigation Act;

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

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under the proviso of Article 69(1) of the Criminal Act for the inducement order is highly likely to mislead fishermen of the Republic of Korea as a matter of undermining the order of adequate preservation and management of the fishery resources of the Republic of Korea by conducting fishery activities without obtaining permission in the exclusive economic zone of the Republic of Korea. It is highly necessary to punish fishermen of the Republic of Korea with a large number of decent fishermen working in the difficult environment.

Provided, That the fact that the defendant is recognized to be wrong, the size of the ship, the method of operation, the frequency of operation, catch, and other matters.

arrow