The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In determining the facts, the Defendant did not have filled up on the 592m2 square meters prior to C in Echeon-si, and the Defendant found the Defendant guilty despite the absence of permission to change the form and quality of the land since the instant land was filled up to recover its function as dry field.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1 of the first prosecutorial investigation conducted the following facts: (a) the Defendant led to the first prosecutorial investigation by lawfully adopting and investigating evidence; (b) at the time of the first prosecutorial investigation, the Defendant: (c) led to the confession that “A was embling soil to Da and D”; (d) as he asked questions about the land in the name of I; and (e) as to the reasons why C laid up soil to another person’s land at the investigative agency, the said C was unaware of whether it was another person’s land, and (e) after surveying around May 2012, C was aware of the fact that C was infringed on, and restored to the original state after cutting down the ground; (b) the Defendant’s confession was credibility in the confession; (c) the Defendant, at the second prosecutorial investigation conducted the second prosecutorial investigation, set up soil to D; and (d) the Defendant, at the time of this case’s public official, who was in charge of the instant investigation agency, set up the boundary of the Defendant’s land at the time of the Defendant’s complaint.”