logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2014.05.29 2014고정1204
개발제한구역의지정및관리에관한특별조치법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the lessee of the land B in the Incheon Nam-gu, Incheon.

1. An act of constructing a building, altering the purpose of use, installing a structure, changing the form and quality of land, cutting down bamboo and trees, dividing land, piling-up goods, and piling-up of goods within an illegal building development-restricted zone shall be performed after obtaining permission for acts from the competent authority;

Nevertheless, on July 2013, the Defendant constructed a sand site area of 80 square meters in a sand site in order to use it as an office and a seed nursery in the above B without obtaining permission from the competent administrative agency.

2. Where a corrective order is issued by the competent authority, such as restoration to the original state for a violation, such as illegal construction, in a development restriction zone, the corrective order shall be implemented.

On September 4, 2013, the Defendant received a corrective order from the Nam-dong Incheon Metropolitan City Head of the Nam-gu Office to restore the seeds and seedlings cultivated by October 4, 2013, which was illegally constructed as set forth in the above paragraph (1) from the above B.

However, the Defendant failed to comply with the corrective order on October 4, 2013 due to the Defendant’s failure to restore to its original state after the lapse of October 4, 2013.

B. Around October 15, 2013, the Defendant received a corrective order from the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City head of the Nam-gu Office to restore the illegally constructed office and seed nursery to its original state until October 29, 2013 at the place specified in the foregoing paragraph (1).

However, the Defendant failed to comply with the corrective order on October 29, 2013 due to the Defendant’s failure to restore to its original state after the lapse of October 29, 2013.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of C’s written laws and regulations

1. Article 32 subparagraph 1 of the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Areas of Restricted Development concerning facts constituting the crime, Article 32 subparagraph 2 of the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Areas of Restricted Development, Articles 32 subparagraph 2 and 30 (1) of the Act on Special Measures

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

arrow