logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.01.29 2015노2402
매장문화재보호및조사에관한법률위반
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since a considerable number of relics was discovered in the instant E project site and the third precise excavation was planned, the instant E project site is of considerable academic value deemed to exist in the buried cultural properties. Thus, it is recognized that the instant E project site constitutes “area with high historical value, such as waste sites,” as stipulated under Article 3 subparag. 7 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Protection and Investigation of Burial Cultural Properties (hereinafter “Enforcement Decree”) and Article 13(1)3 of the Burial Cultural Heritage Protection and Investigation Act (hereinafter “Act”).

B. In reviewing the building drawing changed to move the location of the instant E, the Defendant was aware of the fact that the building drawing changed from G to the person in charge of the instant work did not violate the project site of the instant E, but obtained final approval on the modified drawing, and that the new construction of the building in accordance with the modified drawing was changed to the present state of the area where the buried cultural heritage remains.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the instant facts charged is a person who served as C from April 12, 2012 to June 30, 2014.

Upon winning C, the Defendant prepared a new E-construction project site (hereinafter “instant E-project site”) within the Incheon Strengthening-gun D site and tried to newly build E.

The reinforcement of cultural heritage in the vicinity of the office of the reinforcement military government constitutes a State-designated cultural heritage under the Cultural Heritage Protection Act, and the site for the instant E business is a historic and cultural environment preservation area under the Cultural Heritage Protection Act within a distance of about 210 meters from the above reinforcement.

On the other hand, the Defendant tried to construct a new E building on the 4th floor and the 1st underground floor (3 meters from cutting, 21.6 meters from the height of the building) in the instant E site.

In this regard, there is a change of the current state, such as setting up 17 meters high in height and 2 meters high underground or higher in the preservation area of the historic and cultural environment.

arrow