logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 목포지원 2015.01.22 2014고단1990
배타적경제수역에서의외국인어업등에대한주권적권리의행사에관한법률위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 100 million.

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 200,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the master of the People's Republic of China who is also a shipping C (40 tons, six persons on board) in the People's Republic of China.

Although a foreigner intends to engage in fishery activities in an exclusive economic zone of the Republic of Korea, on December 7, 2014, the Defendant captured approximately 1,000 gh from the 48 nautical miles southwest southwest-west, west-west, west-west, west-gun, west-west, west-west (N 34-34, N 124-1, and 5.5 nautical miles inside EE) to the 46 nautical miles (N 34-34, N 124-14, N 124-14, EE) from 19:32 on the same day from 19:32 on the west-west, southwest-west, west-west, west-west, west-west, west-west, west-west, west-west, east-west

Accordingly, the defendant conducted fishery activities without obtaining permission from the Minister of Oceans and Fisheries in the exclusive economic zone of Korea.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Four copies of anti-sea plan, fish-net cutting photo of the electronic sea chart;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police seizure records and list of seizure;

1. Subparagraph 1 of Article 17 and Article 5 (1) of the Act on the Exercise of Sovereign Rights on Foreigners' Fishing, etc. within the relevant legal system on criminal facts;

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

1. The main sentence of Article 21 of the Act on the Exercise of Sovereign Rights on Foreigners' Fishing, etc. in Confiscation Exclusive Economic Zone, Article 132 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. Although the captain of the instant vessel is not the captain of the instant vessel, who is employed by the Defendant in the reason of sentencing under the proviso of Article 69(1) of the Criminal Act of the custody order, the quantity of fishery products captured by conducting fishery activities in the exclusive economic zone is equivalent to 1,00 g, and thus, the amount of fine should be determined

arrow