Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for four months, and imprisonment for six months.

However, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

B is the owner of land and buildings in Namyang-si, which is the development restriction zone, C and D, and the defendant A is the lessee of the above building.

No one shall construct a building, change the use of a building, install a structure, change the form and quality of land, etc. in a zone subject to development restriction without permission from the head of a Si/Gun/Gu.

Defendant

B from April 2016 to September 2017, 2012, the Defendant leased 2 dongs with an area of 250 square meters on the above land to Defendant A to use it as a store for the storage of the goods. Defendant A leased 2 dongs for the above mushroom growing shed for the same period, and used it as a storage of the goods for the said period.

As a result, Defendants conspired to change the use of the building in the development restriction zone without permission of the South-North Korean market.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Contract for lease of warehouse;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Defendants: Article 32 Subparag. 1 of the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Areas subject to Restrictions on Development; the proviso to Article 12(1) of the same Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants on probation: The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Code is committed in collusion by the Defendants to change the purpose of the crime to the storage of goods stored in the door-to-door distribution warehouse; Defendant A was sentenced to a fine once for the same crime; Defendant B was sentenced to three times a fine; and Defendant B was sentenced to three times a fine; in particular, Defendant B received considerable profits from the crime of this case.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendants recognized the crime and reflected the crime, and that the defendant B restored the building of this case to five growing houses, and that the defendants did not have any criminal record of a fine or heavier punishment, is favorable.

In these circumstances, the sentencing conditions under Article 51 of the Criminal Act shall be determined as per Disposition in consideration of all the conditions of sentencing.