logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2013.10.25 2013고정266
농지법위반
Text

The sentence of punishment against the Defendants shall be suspended separately.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant B is an owner of farmland of 1596 square meters in Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, an agricultural promotion area.

Those who intend to divert farmland in an agricultural promotion area shall obtain permission from the Minister for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, as prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Nevertheless, from November 201 to August 25, 2012, the Defendant used farmland as a parking lot without obtaining permission for the diversion of 440 square meters out of farmland 1596 square meters in the said agricultural promotion area.

2. A person who intends to divert farmland in an agricultural promotion area for defendant A shall obtain permission from the Minister for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries.

Nevertheless, on January 10, 2012, the Defendant used farmland 2,536 square meters (ownership of a model G) located in Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Busan Metropolitan City, which is an agricultural promotion area, as a parking lot without obtaining permission.

Accordingly, the defendant diverted farmland in the agricultural promotion area without obtaining permission to divert farmland.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each legal statement of the witness H and I;

1. Application of each statute on a written accusation;

1. Defendants of relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Articles 57(1) and 34(1) of the Farmland Act; selection of fines

1. Defendant A who is to suspend the sentence: Fine of 2,000,000 won Defendant B: fine of 1,000,000 won;

1. Defendants to be detained in a workhouse: Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants of suspended sentence: Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (i.e., the confession and reflect, the circumstances and motive leading to the instant case are considered; Defendant B completed restitution; Defendant A also obtained a substitute garage site and carried out relevant construction; and Defendant A appears to have completed restitution immediately, taking into account various circumstances indicated in the trial and the record)

arrow