The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of facts (i.e., rearrangement work in the forest land as stated in the judgment of the court below and resulting in the formation of the farmland as farmland, the Defendant’s act does not change the form of the land itself, and thus cannot be deemed to have changed the mountainous district under the Mountainous Districts Management Act.

Doshe did not have any intention to convert the place to the defendant.

Article 6,900 square meters of forest land area as stated in the judgment below (i.e., 3,900 square meters of forest land B in Gyeyang-gu) was already reclaimed, and the Defendant did not work. Thus, the Defendant’s area of converted forest does not reach 6,90 square meters of forest land area.

In light of the circumstances mentioned above, it cannot be viewed that the forest recovery cost of KRW 5,281,260 as stated in the judgment of the court below has been calculated properly.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment with labor for six months) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. Article 2 subparagraph 2 of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act means afforestation of mountainous districts, forest tending, felling or extracting standing trees, gathering forest products, such as earth and rocks, and using mountainous districts for purposes other than or temporarily using forest products prescribed by Presidential Decree, or changing the form or quality of mountainous districts for such purposes. Article 14(1) of the same Act provides that a person who intends to convert mountainous districts shall obtain permission from the Administrator of the Korea Forest Service, etc. according to the classification of the types, size, etc. of mountainous districts prescribed by Presidential Decree

On the other hand, changing the form and quality of a mountainous district means changing the form and quality of the mountainous district externally and changing the form and quality of the mountainous district into a state where it is difficult to restore the mountainous district due to such changing.

(see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do2008, May 24, 2012). Determination of the credibility of a confession is based on whether the content of the confession itself lacks objective rationality, and the motive or reason for the confession.