beta
Text
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,000.
If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
The Defendant, who actually operates a corporation D, is a person who has overall control over the collection of earth and rocks at the work site where D obtained permission to collect earth and rocks from the competent administrative agency, with respect to the forest land of 37,438m2, 11,785m2 among forest land in F, and 55,770m2 among forest land in G, the Defendant is a person who has overall control over the collection of earth and rocks at the work site where D is working.
Where a person who has obtained permission to collect earth or stone intends to collect earth or stone beyond the permission to collect earth or stone or to create access roads, he/she shall obtain permission for change.
Nevertheless, on March 201, the Defendant created a certain area of 9,164 square meters in mountainous districts, which are located outside the above earth and rocks, and collected earth and rocks without obtaining permission for change of earth and rocks.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Legal statement of the witness H;
1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to entries in a survey report on actual condition;
1. The indictment under Article 54 Subparag. 4 of the former Mountainous Districts Management Act (wholly amended by Act No. 11352, Feb. 22, 2012; hereinafter “former Mountainous Districts Management Act”) regarding criminal facts and Article 54 Subparag. 4 of the former Mountainous Districts Management Act (wholly amended by Act No. 11352, Feb. 22, 2012), which appears to be a clerical error in Article 54 Subparag. 4.
§ 25.1. Selection of fine
1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act was that the area of a mountainous district created by the Defendant as an access road without obtaining permission for change is larger than 9,164 square meters and a part of a forest is damaged.
However, it seems that the defendant's creation of entry roads beyond the above permitted zone is inevitable to allow entry of vehicles due to the topographical problems of the land for permission of this case. However, the defendant should have considered such problems at the stage of obtaining permission, but his responsibility is somewhat weak in that he did not do so.