The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The Defendant is the owner of Ilyang-dong, Busan Metropolitan City C, which is a mountainous district.

around October 31, 2012, the Defendant, upon receiving the first order to remove the said structure by November 30, 2012, the Defendant failed to comply with the second order to remove the said structure from the Defendant’s house to December 21, 2012, even though he/she received the second order to remove the said structure from the Defendant’s house to December 21, 2012, the Defendant did not comply with the second order without justifiable grounds, even though he/she received the second order to remove the said structure from the Defendant’s house up to December 21, 2012.

2. Determination as to whether a mountainous district constitutes a “ mountainous district” subject to the application of the Mountainous Districts Management Act, etc. should be based on the actual status of the pertinent land regardless of its land category in the public register. If, even if land category on the land cadastre is a forest and field, it cannot be deemed that the state of loss as a mountainous district is temporary, and it cannot be deemed that the land is located in a mountainous district in light of surrounding surrounding circumstances, etc., the land does not constitute a mountainous district under the Mountainous Districts Management Act, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4360, Sept. 14, 2006). With regard to this case, the evidence submitted for health stand and inspection alone alone is insufficient to recognize that the Il-dong land in Yongsan-gu is a “ mountainous district” under the Mountainous Districts

Rather, comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances revealed in the trial and records, such as the present state photograph at the time of the instant land, or the witness E’s statement, the said land cannot be deemed temporary, and it cannot be deemed that the state of loss is a stone site, etc. located within a mountainous district in light of neighboring surrounding circumstances. Therefore, in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the said land does not constitute “a mountainous district” under the Mountainous Districts Management Act.