The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the reasons for appeal (the imprisonment of eight months and the fine of ten million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of court-oriented trials and the principle of direct determination, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The Defendant appears to have an attitude against the recognition of the instant crime, the restoration of the original state was confirmed by the Jeju market on May 9, 2016, and the Defendant did not have any record of criminal punishment for the same kind of crime before the instant crime was committed.

However, for the sake of preserving the environment of Jeju Special Self-Governing Province, heavy punishment is required for illegal diversion of mountainous districts; when a forest is damaged, it is difficult to restore it to its original state or requires a long time; and the defendant has committed not only the diversion of mountainous districts but also the crime of illegal cutting of pine trees to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, motive and background of each of the instant offenses, means and methods, and all the sentencing factors expressed in the instant records and trial process, including the circumstances after the commission of the offense, the sentence imposed by the lower court is not deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, or to have been too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.