A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant is a public official of Grade C of local tax affairs of Grade C.

1. On December 13, 2013, the Defendant was found to have obtained permission for conversion of mountainous district to create golf course sites D and E, with the victim H who operated G at the second floor of the F community service center in Gangseo-si, Gangnam-si, Seoul on December 13, 2013.

One-lane development permission is referred to as "the primary site" in the column.

) Ground pine trees of KRW 500 (Tirre 30 or more per 220 million per 20,000,000,000 for contract deposit immediately, and later, the remainder after taking out pine trees, shall be paid.

At present, permission for mountainous district conversion has already been granted for the relevant site, and only the certificate of transfer has been obtained.

at least on March 15, 2014, may be shipped out on or around March 15, 2014.

"Finally false."

However, according to the notification of permission to engage in a golf course development project under the name of the Gangnam market on November 15, 2013, according to the terms and conditions of the permission, the whole quantity of trees in the project site was transplanted in accordance with the small environmental impact assessment opinion and the project plan on the standing trees in the project site, and reusable for shielding forest and landscaping, but, with respect to pine trees extracted at the time of construction works, the method of planting all in the project site after planting them within the project site, shall not be taken out outside the project site, and if this condition is violated, permission (consultation), permission (consultation) may be cancelled pursuant to the Management of Mountainous Districts Act, and the defendant was involved in the golf course development project conducted in Gangnam-si D and E (State). Therefore, it was well known that the removal of pine trees in the above site was impossible, and there was no authority to purchase any contract related to pine trees in the first site with each owner of the land and to sell pine trees to any other person who is not entitled to pay it.

Nevertheless, the defendant is unable to remove pine trees from the victim and pine trees.