The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding, misunderstanding of legal principles, the forest part of the instant forest land (D. 953.12 square meters of forest land in Cheongju-si) was used as farming by residents, and there was no standing timber. Moreover, since the Defendant established a soil pipe on the underground in the process of restoring the part of the instant forest land damaged due to excellent quality after obtaining consent from E, the owner of the forest part of the instant case, the Defendant did not change the form and quality of the mountainous district as stated in the facts charged and diverted it without permission.

B. The sentence sentenced to the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles

A. Although the lower court also asserted that the Defendant had the same purport as the alleged misunderstanding of the above facts and the misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion and rendered a judgment of conviction for the following reasons.

The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and examined: (a) the Defendant removed trees planted in the instant forest area and performed flat work; and (b) installed a soil center. This constitutes a typical form and quality alteration act; (b) the Defendant asserted that the instant forest area was a place where the forest area was used as a farm and lost its phenomenon as a mountainous district; (c) however, the part of the instant forest area was a small-scale passage through which neighboring residents used the forest as a intermittent transit; (d) as such, the Defendant lost the phenomenon of the instant forest area as a mountainous district due to such level of passage.

In full view of the fact that the Defendant damaged the mountainous district of 953m2, which far exceeds the size of the passage route, and made a concrete package and installed soil pipes, the Defendant’s form and quality of the forest of this case as indicated in the facts charged.