1. Judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor

A. The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, acquitted Defendant A, limited liability companies B, and G on the part of the facts charged against Defendant A, limited liability companies, and G on the ground that there was no proof of a crime regarding the violation of the Wastes Control Act due to the illegal reclamation of minerals.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the record, the lower court did not exhaust all necessary deliberations and did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

Meanwhile, among the facts charged against Defendant G, the part of the violation of the Wastes Control Act due to the violation of the standards for recycling wastes is not indicated in the petition of appeal and the appellate brief.

B. The lower court found Defendant D, E, and F not guilty on the charges against Defendant D, E, and F, on the grounds as stated in its reasoning, on the ground that there was no proof of crime regarding the facts charged against Defendant D, E, and F.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the record, the lower court did not exhaust all necessary deliberations and did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

2. The lower court found Defendant A, B, and G guilty of the facts charged against Defendant A, limited liability companies, and G (excluding orders and the part not guilty of grounds) on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court’s determination exceeds the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or violates amendments to indictments, and Articles 65 subparag. 1 and 13 of the former Wastes Control Act (amended by Act No. 14783, Apr. 18, 2017; hereinafter the same) on the basis of the standards and methods for waste disposal, and the violation of Articles 63 subparag. 2 and 8(2) of the Wastes Control Act.