2. Where the defendant does not pay the above fine; 50.

The defendant is a person who actually runs a manufacturer of metal products in Kimhae-si B.

No business operator shall operate a large preventive facility to operate emission facilities or discharge pollutants discharged from emission facilities, mixing with air, in order to lower the degree of pollution.

As between November 26, 2012 and 14:30 on November 26, 2012, the Defendant operated one strawing facility in capacity of 338.4 cubic meters, which is a waiting emission facility reported at the said C’s place of business, and the Defendant did not operate one strawing facility with a capacity of 1,000 cubic meters/minutes, and one strawing facility with a capacity of 1,000 cubic meters/minutes, and one strawing facility with a capacity of 1,00

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A public official statement in D;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (report accompanied by a copy of report on installation of air emission facilities);

1. Article 89 subparagraph 3 of the Clean Air Conservation Act and Article 31 (1) 1 of the same Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

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

1. It is so decided as per Disposition for not less than Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.