The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. According to the evidence related to the summary of the grounds for appeal, the Defendant is sufficiently recognized as a project owner who committed an act of changing the form and quality without permission in collusion with I as an actor, and the corrective order issued on March 20, 2013 in the Boan market (hereinafter “instant corrective order”) is lawful and valid since it is deemed that the Defendant was deemed an actor of changing the form and quality without permission and was issued as an actor of changing the form and quality.

However, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the defendant is erroneous.

2. The summary of the facts charged is the owner of the E, F, and G forest (hereinafter “H forest”) in Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, and I is the defendant’s relative living together, who newly constructs apartment buildings in the said H forest.

A person who intends to engage in development activities, such as changing the form and quality of land, shall obtain permission for development activities from the competent authority. However, the Defendant, in collusion with I, divided the said H forest from around June 13, 201 to around June 28 of the same month into three parts, cut approximately 1 to 3 meters, cut about 105 tons, and changed the form and quality of approximately 308 square meters without permission by making a stable with earth and rocks on the cut part.

Although the Defendant received an order to take measures to restore H forest land to its original state by June 30, 2013 under the name of the Boan City Mayor around March 26, 2013, the Defendant violated the above order to take measures by failing to comply with such order until June 30, 2013.

3. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the following grounds. A.

Even if the corrective order of this case was issued against the defendant, such as the statement in the facts charged, the corrective order of this case issued to the defendant, not the actor of the unauthorized change of form and quality, is unlawful. Thus, the defendant cannot be punished as a violation of the order of this case under Article 142 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act on the ground that the defendant did not comply with such corrective order.