A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On May 2013, the Defendant violated the permission to convert mountainous districts: (a) the Defendant reclaimed the total area of 13,860 square meters of land as dry field and converted the use of heavy equipment, such as pokes, etc., by planting bamboos, etc. to roots, and embling the mountainous district, without obtaining the permission to convert mountainous districts; and (b) the Defendant converted the use of mountainous districts into dry field, by reclaiming the area of 13,860 square meters of land as dry field.

2. On May 2013, the Defendant reported the temporary use of a mountainous district, the Defendant: (a) removed bamboo, etc. using heavy equipment, such as pokes, etc., without reporting the temporary use of the mountainous district; and (b) made it a work to flatize a mountainous district; and (c) temporarily use the mountainous district without reporting the temporary use of the mountainous district.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the prosecution with regard to G;

1. Submission of a report on the results of business trips, the calendar map of illegally damaged forests, the current status of areas damaged by forests, and the current status of areas where illegal forests are damaged by lots;

1. Application of each statute on photographs;

1. Relevant Article 53 subparagraph 1 of the relevant Act and the main sentence of Article 14 (1) of the Management of the Mountainous Districts which are subject to the option of punishment (unauthorized mountainous districts) concerning criminal facts, and Articles 55 subparagraph 2 and 15-2 (2) 7 of the Mountainous Districts Management Act and the selection of imprisonment, respectively;

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. In light of the fact that the area of a mountainous district which was diverted or temporarily used by the defendant without undergoing the procedure, etc., for the reason of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution, is considerably significant, the punishment for the crime is to be mitigated, but it appears that the defendant has completed his/her restoration in good faith against his/her own crime, and there are some circumstances to be taken into account in the circumstances of the crime of this case, including the fact that there are no criminal history of the defendant and there are no criminal history of the same kind of crime, and that there are no criminal history of the defendant, the punishment is to be determined as ordered by taking into account the circumstances favorable to the defendant, and