가축분뇨의관리및이용에관한법률위반
The defendant is innocent.
1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant reported the installation of waste-generating facilities while operating a facility for raising pigs in Singju City. The reporter of the installation of livestock excreta-generating facilities has a duty of care not to bring them into public waters in discharging livestock excreta.
Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this on July 20, 2014 and failed to verify the quantity of the storage tank installed in the said swine breeding facility and the passage of discharge, etc., and caused the storage tank to be cut off due to excreta, etc. discharged through cleaning at the said swine breeding facility. Thus, the Defendant discharged livestock excreta equivalent to 0.25 cubic meters of 0.25 meters of 0 meters of 0.25 meters of 0 meters of 0.25 meters of 0 meters of 0 meters of 0.25 meters of 0 meters of 0.
2. Determination:
A. Criminal facts in a criminal trial should be established based on strict evidence with probative value, which leads a judge to confluence of a reasonable doubt. Therefore, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof does not sufficiently reach the extent that the defendant’s assertion or defense is inconsistent or unreasonable, there is suspicion of guilt, such as where the defendant’s assertion or defense is inconsistent or unreasonable.
Even if the interests of the defendant should be judged.
(Supreme Court Decision 2008Do8137 Decided January 5, 2009, etc.)
B. In light of the above legal principles, in light of the following circumstances revealed through the records of this case, it is difficult to recognize that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was negligent in relation to the accident of this case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.
C. According to evidence, it is recognized that livestock excreta leaked from Defendant’s money death flows into D.
However, the outflow route has exceeded the excreta in the storage tank, and it is stored.