The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the defendant's intention of violating the River Act cannot be found, the judgment of the court below which judged otherwise and sentenced the defendant guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The punishment of the lower judgment that was unfair in sentencing (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below, namely, that the defendant installed a downline in a river without obtaining permission, and was notified from Kimhae-si that he would remove a downline over several times, the defendant also made efforts to obtain permission to occupy and use, and that the defendant led to confession of a crime at the court below, the defendant's intentional act in violation of the River Act can be sufficiently recognized. Thus, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. We examine the determination of the unfair argument of sentencing, and the fact that the river illegally occupied and used for a long period of about 20 years is the reason for disadvantageous sentencing, and the defendant is the defendant's endeavor to obtain permission to occupy and use the river, but the illegal state continues to exist as a result of the relevant administrative agencies' failure to perform their duties, and the fact that the ship was used for fishermen, and that there was no criminal record exceeding the same criminal record or fine is favorable reasons for sentencing.

In full view of the above sentencing factors, in full view of the Defendant’s age, family relation, economic situation, background and motive leading up to the commission of the crime, and all other matters on the sentencing as indicated in the records and arguments of this case, the judgment below’s punishment is unlimited and unfair, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion is with merit.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is partially reasonable, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

(b).