beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) is that the Defendant, as indicated in the judgment of the court below (hereinafter “instant land”), engaged in flatization work to raise the collection and loss of part of the land as indicated in the judgment of the court below, and installed a farming shed for temporary rest during the farming work, and does not divert the instant land, which is farmland, into the land of farmer’s house.
2. Determination
A. From early April 2012 to October 2012, the Defendant removed saf trees planted in a permanent city C owned by the Defendant without filing a report with the permanent mayor for the purpose of forming a house in a permanent city C, and then cut and embling the area equivalent to 900 square meters of the farmland used as a private orchard by installing a farming shed, which was used as a private orchard, was diverted to the site of a farmer’s house.
B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged by comprehensively taking account of the following evidence.
C. 1) Whether cutting and filling up of the instant land constitutes diversion of farmland is as indicated in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes (1) or whether it constitutes the act of using farmland for purposes other than agricultural production or improvement of farmland, such as changing the form and quality of farmland or installing tangible objects that may obstruct the use of farmland, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Do6703, Apr. 16, 2009; 2010Do5112, Oct. 25, 2012; 2010Do5112, “conversion of farmland” refers to all the acts of using farmland for purposes other than diversion of farmland without using the language and text as it is intended to be used for any other purpose, in light of the purpose and purpose of Article 2 subparag. 7 of the former Farmland Act (hereinafter “former Farmland Act”), and the purpose and purpose of preserving and managing the farmland in the instant case (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Do6703, Apr. 16, 2013).