The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant permitted to engage in a “coastal-net fishing” as stated in the fishing vessel inspection certificate, except for the “coastal-net fishing” for fishermen, and as such, the Defendant did not have the intent to commit the instant crime.

Judgment

Article 41 of the Fisheries Act provides that a person who intends to conduct permitted fisheries shall obtain permission from an administrative agency for each fishing vessel or fishing gear, and Article 49 of the same Act provides that if a person other than a person who has obtained a fishery permit by applying mutatis mutandis Article 35 subparagraph 4 of the same Act actually controls the operation of the relevant fishery business, a person who succeeds to, purchases, or leases a fishing vessel, etc. from a person who has obtained a fishery permit shall succeed to the status of the person who has obtained the fishery permit; however, Article 44 of the same Act provides that the person shall report the succession to the status of the person who has obtained the fishery permit, and shall meet the standards for the fishing vessel granted the fishery permit and the qualification of the applicant for the fishery permit

According to the Defendant’s statement and fishery permit certificate as to the instant case, the fact that E used a fishing vessel using C to obtain a fishery permit under Article 2012-0058 of the Lansung City Coast Complex Fisheries Act (hereinafter “Investigation Record”), the Defendant leased C from E to engage in the fishery, and the Defendant was not separately granted a permit for self-net fishing (hereinafter “Investigation Record No. 16”), and the Defendant succeeds to the status of E granted a fishery permit under Article 44 of the Fisheries Act and the burden imposed on the fishery permit, etc.

It is sufficient to view that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the permitted fishery by leasing a fishing vessel was only “coastal complex fishery” as stated in the fishery permit certificate (the Defendant, at the lower court, led to the confession of the facts charged in the instant case), the Fisheries Act, and the fishing vessel inspection certificate.