The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts and legal principles) ① the Defendant obtained permission from the Myeon Office having jurisdiction over the Myeon Office, and performed D reconstruction Works (hereinafter “the instant construction”) located in Seocheon City C. ② The instant construction works do not have to obtain permission since they constitute “a repair work to the extent that does not affect the shape and function of a small river” under the proviso of Article 10(1) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Small Rivers and Article 7(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Small Rivers. (3) The instant construction works constitute “a temporary construction of a small river facility or other artificial structure” under the proviso of Article 14(1) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Small Rivers and Article 11 subparag. 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Small Rivers, and there is no need to obtain permission, and ④ the Defendant, upon the completion of the construction before and after the commencement of the construction works, should be deemed to have erred by misapprehending the legal principles of Article 16 of the Criminal Act.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged and the lower court’s determination 1) A person who intends to newly construct, rebuild, or alter an artificial structure in a small river, etc. in the summary of the public prosecution room, etc., in spite of obtaining permission from the managing authority, the Defendant removed (former) D on November 1, 2016 without obtaining permission from the managing authority, and constructed a concrete structure structure structure (referring to two meters in width, three meters in length, and one meter in height).

2) The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, and rejected the Defendant’s defense as indicated in the summary of the grounds for appeal (i) through (iii) on the following grounds.

(1) The Small River Maintenance Act.