1. Based on its stated reasoning, the lower court: (a) deemed that Article 25(9)1 of the Wastes Control Act provides that waste disposal business entities shall keep wastes in an appropriate place, such as storage facilities in the permitted place of business, not necessarily “specified storage facilities in the permitted place of business”; and (b) determined that the charge that the Defendant stored wastes in an “reasonable storage facilities in the permitted place of business” was not sufficiently proven.

2. However, the lower court’s determination is difficult to accept for the following reasons.

Article 25 (9) 1 of the Wastes Control Act provides that "to keep wastes in an appropriate place, such as storage facilities or temporary storage facilities approved as prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Environment," as a matter of obligation to be observed by a waste disposal business entity. According to such delegation, Article 30-2 of the Enforcement Rule of the Wastes Control Act provides that "temporary storage facilities approved pursuant to Article 9 (4) of the Enforcement Rule or approved pursuant to paragraph (5) of the same Article, temporary storage facilities approved pursuant to paragraph (5) of the same Article, temporary storage facilities approved pursuant to Article 11 (2) of the Enforcement Rule, temporary storage facilities approved pursuant to paragraph (3) of the same Article, or temporary storage facilities approved pursuant to paragraph (3) of the same Article, and waste storage facilities permitted pursuant to Article 28 (4) of the Enforcement Rule, or permitted for modification pursuant to paragraph (3) of the same

In addition, Article 7 (1) 6 of the Enforcement Decree of the Wastes Control Act provides that "where a person who disposes of or recycles wastes stores wastes, he/she shall store them in storage facilities located in the same place of business as the waste disposal facilities or recycling facilities."