The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (the imprisonment of six months, the suspended execution of two years, the additional collection of 5,120,640 won) is too unreasonable.

2. The lower court, ex officio, applied the former Creation and Management of Forest Resources Act (amended by Act No. 14987, Oct. 31, 2017; hereinafter “former Act”) to Article 2 of the facts constituting the crime as indicated in the lower judgment.

In that sense, the Creation and Management of Forest Resources Act (amended by Act No. 14987, Oct. 31, 2017; hereinafter “former Act”) was enforced from May 1, 2018, which was following the pronouncement of the lower judgment.

Through the amendment of the above Act, the act of felling unauthorized standing timber, which was punished by imprisonment with labor for not more than five years pursuant to Article 74 (1) 3 of the former Act or by a fine not exceeding 15 million won, was punished by imprisonment with labor for not more than three years or by a fine not exceeding 30 million won pursuant to Article 74 (2) 2 of the current Act.

This seems to be a reflective measure from the fact that the previous penal provisions are excessive, so it constitutes “when a punishment is less than that of the previous penal provisions due to a change in the law after the crime” under Article 1(2) of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, the current law, not the former law, should be applied to the above criminal facts.

Since the lower court rendered a single sentence on the grounds that the violation of the Creation and Management of Forest Resources Act and the remainder of the violation are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, which have the grounds for ex officio destruction, the entire lower judgment cannot be maintained.

3. According to the conclusion, the judgment of the court below is omitted, and the judgment of the court below is reversed in whole pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following is again decided after pleading.

【Grounds for a new judgment】 The facts constituting an offense and summary of evidence recognized by the court are identical to the facts constituting an offense and summary of evidence, and thus, the gist of evidence is identical to each of the corresponding columns of the judgment below. Therefore, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.