beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. A person who intends to temporarily use a mountainous district for the purpose of creating mountain paths, such as work roads, for a mountainous district other than the mountainous district conserved in the indictment shall report thereon to the head of a Si/Gun/Gu;
Nevertheless, on February 2018, the Defendant damaged KRW 2,782,110 of the restoration cost by expanding the existing work route without reporting the temporary use of the mountainous district, in Cheongyang-gun, Chungcheongnamyang-gun, E forest, and approximately 180 square meters, which is owned by the garden.
2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, it is recognized that the employees of F Co., Ltd., the Defendant, the representative director of which was the Defendant on the day of the instant case, extended the work route by using scrailss, and that public officials pointed out the violation of the Mountainous Districts Management Act and asked the construction manager to the on-site workers, who were in charge of the construction work, and that the employees informed of the contact details of the Defendant, and that the Defendant was on the spot by phone from a public official at the site and appeared on the site
On the other hand, the defendant argued that the expansion of the work route is conducted without his direction or involvement at the site, and the G actually engaged in the work also stated that the work route is broad without the defendant's direction.
All the evidence submitted by the prosecutor is merely about the process of recognizing the fact of mountainous district damage at the site, the situation before and after the work, etc., and there is no evidence to deem that the expanded work was conducted under the defendant's instruction or involvement, such as the facts charged.
3. In conclusion, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, a judgment of innocence shall be rendered after the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, but the summary of the judgment of innocence shall not be publicly announced pursuant to the proviso of Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act, as stated in the Disposition above.