A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

A person who owns livestock has contracted or contracted a contagious disease with livestock or livestock that died of an unidentified disease;

Where an epidemiological investigation, close inspection results, or clinical symptoms exist, a report shall be filed with the competent authority without delay, as prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry.

Nevertheless, on January 21, 2017, the Defendant: (a) discovered the fact that 15 maris were dead due to an unidentified disease owned by the Defendant, which was raised in D in the operation of the Defendant, around Yacheon-si on January 21, 2017; (b) did not report the fact that 15 maris were dead due to an unidentified disease; and (c) died of 4,000 maris around January 23, 2017; and (d) did not report the death of 8,000 maris that were raised on January 24, 2017.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of each police statement with respect to E and F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes stated in a written request for an investigation, an urgent preventive measure against avian influenza's diseases, and an investigation report (Attachment of a reverse academic report);

1. Relevant Article of the Act on the Prevention of Contagious Diseases by Livestock, and subparagraphs 1 and 11 of Article 56 of the Act on the Prevention of Contagious Diseases by Livestock Eligible for the Selection of Crimes (Selection of Imprisonment);

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following circumstances considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) and the main sentence of Article 62-2(2) of the Criminal Act for the observation of protection and observation, as in the instant case, increases 2,3 times the rate of death of the chickens on the ground of late notice of suspicion (the page 52 of the evidence record). The other farmers, due to the Defendant’s act, suffered significant property damage, such as taking measures restricting the movement of chickens and being additionally slaughtered, and the cost of KRW 1 billion is presumed to have been more incurred in the process (Evidence 17,81 through 85, 91, 95 of the evidence record). After the occurrence of the instant case, on June 24, 2017, the Plaintiff carried out the work of restoring the damage of the Reading on the ground of Chapter 1.