logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2018.03.26 2017고정214
국토의계획및이용에관한법률위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

A person who intends to engage in development activities shall obtain permission from the Special Metropolitan City Mayor, a Metropolitan City Mayor, a Metropolitan Autonomous City Mayor, a Special Self-Governing Province Governor, or the head

Nevertheless, the Defendant, from February 2016 to May 2, 2016, installed a stone fenced on the boundary at a height of about 2 meters without obtaining permission of the electric utility market, on the land of the area of 4,438 square meters in Masan-gu B and C, Jeonju-si, Jeonju-si, which is owned by the Defendant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Application of accusation, current status map, field photographing statutes;

1. Article 140 subparagraph 1 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act and Article 56 (1) of the same Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Claims that they do not fall under a retaining wall or wall;

A. After raising the instant land, the Defendant filed an application for permission to engage in development activities aimed at changing the form and quality of the land. Since an administrative agency required to devise measures to prevent soil erosion even if the act of raising earth and sand constitutes the creation of good farmland, it cannot be deemed that the retaining wall or fence, which is a structure under the Building Act, is a retaining wall or fence in light of its form, method, function, etc.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence investigated by this court, it is recognized that the Defendant Stockpiling a stone constitutes a retaining wall or wall under the Building Act.

1) In order to prevent the outflow of earth and sand to the adjoining land due to the filling-up of the instant land, the Defendant accumulated the instant land in the form of piling-up in large natural rocks depending on the boundary of the filled-up part.

In light of the purpose, place, scale, and form of stone piling, it is intended to prevent the collapse or soil erosion of the filled-up part.

arrow