logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 경주지원 2018.11.15 2018고정150
골재채취법위반
Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

Defendant

If A does not pay the above fine, 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is the representative of B Co., Ltd. located in Ulsan Nam-gu D.

1. A person who intends to extract aggregate shall obtain permission from the head of the competent Si/Gun/Gu office, as prescribed by Presidential Decree;

Nevertheless, on February 24, 2018, around February 25, 2018, and around March 1, 2018, the Defendant extracted aggregate by using machinery, such as refacing seasons, etc., without obtaining permission from the competent authority, from the size of E and F, the size of 3,590 square meters, around March 1, 2018.

2. Defendant B Co., Ltd. extracted aggregate without obtaining permission from the competent authority as described in the above 1. As to the Defendant’s business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement made by the police with regard to G and H;

1. A written accusation;

1. Accusation against illegal extraction of aggregate - A written accusation, written statement, and current status of extraction of aggregate, field photographs, orders for restoration of the sources of extraction of illegal aggregate, and thorough management of places of business;

1. Application of the law of the police statement protocol to G and H

1. A person who is subject to the pertinent Article of the Act on the Recovery of Aggregates and who is subject to the option of punishment: Comprehensively, Article 49 subparagraph 3 of the said Act and Article 22 (1) of the said Act, Defendant B, who is subject to the option of fine: Articles 51, 49 subparagraph 3, and 22 (1) of the said Act;

1. Defendant A who is detained in a workhouse: Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: (a) The grounds for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act led to the Defendants’ crime of this case; (b) the period of screening used by the Defendants; (c) the length of the period of permission; (d) the period of extraction of aggregate after the period of permission; and (e) the continuous extraction of aggregate despite the public official in charge; and (d) the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, means and consequence of the commission of the crime; and (e) the various sentencing conditions specified in the trial process of this case, including the circumstances after the commission of the

arrow