logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.07.10 2017노799
하천법위반
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable as it is too unfasible to the sentence (3 million won in penalty and 2 million won in penalty) declared by the court below against the defendant.

2. In light of the fact that each of the crimes of this case committed by the defendant who occupied and used land within a considerably broad river area without the permission of the competent authority but failed to comply with the order of restoration from the river management authority, the nature of each of the crimes of this case is not less than that of the crime, and that the restoration was not carried out even until now, it is necessary to punish the defendant strictly.

However, if the defendant has lawfully occupied and used the land within the river area with the permission of the competent authority and has lost the authority to occupy and use the land due to the cancellation of the disposition for the permission for occupation and use by the public interest necessity of the competent authority, and there are some circumstances to consider the circumstances. The defendant's fault is against his own mistake, and some of the crimes of this case are concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the so-called Criminal Code, which became final and conclusive on June 3, 2016, and the punishment should be determined in consideration of the balance between the crimes of special injury and the crime of this case and the crime of this case, and the defendant has no record of criminal punishment for the same crime. Considering the fact that there is no record of criminal punishment for the same crime, other factors such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, circumstance of each crime of this case, and circumstances before and after the crime, etc., the prosecutor's above assertion has no merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow