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

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

1. The Defendant violated the River Act due to the occupation and use of the river site was transferred from C who actually occupied the said land at Kimhae-si, a river site, on February 2, 2018. From around that time to December 31, 2019, the Defendant occupied the said land by cultivating crops in the said land without permission from the river management agency.

2. While the Defendant violated the River Act due to the non-performance of an order to take measures was served on October 17, 2019 with an order to reinstate the site of a river that illegally occupied and cultivated agricultural crops from the Kimhae market near Busan Northern-gu, Busan in order to restore the said site to its original state, the Defendant did not comply with the order to take measures by November 15, 2019, within the fixed period.

Summary of Evidence

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the accused’s legal statement, accusation, field photograph, restoration to the original state of illegal acts, investigation report (in relation to the statement of witness), investigation report (in relation to the accusation and submission of suspect data), investigation report (in

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, subparagraph 5 of Article 95, Article 33 (1) 1 of the River Act (the occupation of a river site without permission), subparagraph 10 of Article 95 of the River Act, and Article 69 (1) 1 of the same Act (the occupation of a violation of an order of reinstatement), the selection of fines;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is that the defendant recognized the crime of this case to reflect his mistake, the defendant committed the crime of this case in the course of cultivating crops by taking over the de facto cultivation right of the land as stated in the judgment for living, the defendant appears to have fully fulfilled the restoration order in the Kim Sea market after the prosecution, the defendant has only the history of being punished for the crime of injury, and other facts.