영업소폐쇄처분취소
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff is a company that manufactures and sells weapons and guns at the window B of Changwon-si located in the area where the installation of wastewater discharge facilities is restricted pursuant to Article 33(6) of the former Water Quality and Aquatic Ecosystem Conservation Act (amended by Act No. 14532, Jan. 17, 2017; hereinafter “Water Quality and Ecosystem Conservation Act”).
The Plaintiff installed 30 parts of CNC Line and 10 parts of MCT Line at the location of the instant installation (hereinafter “instant facilities”) and operated the instant facilities using water-savinged water so that wastewater can be discharged.
B. On March 24, 2016, the Changwon District Prosecutors' Office confirmed that the Plaintiff was operating the instant facility, which is a wastewater discharge facility, without obtaining permission in the area where the installation of wastewater discharge facilities is restricted. On May 30, 2016, on the grounds that the Plaintiff violated the Water Quality Ecosystem Act, as stated in attached Table 1, and notified the head of the Changwon-si, Changwon District Prosecutors' Office of prosecution on the same day on the ground that the Plaintiff violated the Water Quality Ecosystem Act.
The plaintiff was convicted in the first instance court (the Changwon District Court 2016Ma1475) of the criminal procedure following the above indictment, and the plaintiff appealed, but the appellate court has also affirmed the conviction, and the plaintiff's appeal against this was dismissed, and the conviction became final and conclusive.
C. On July 27, 2016, the Defendant issued an order to close down wastewater discharge facilities without permission (hereinafter “instant disposition”) with respect to the instant facilities in violation of Article 33(1) and (5) of the Water Quality and Ecosystem Act, on July 29, 2016, on the ground that the relevant provisions of law were applicable to the Plaintiff.
On May 16, 2018, the court of first instance has Articles 42 and 44 of the Water Quality Ecosystem Act that allows the Defendant to issue an order of closure under the Water Quality and Ecosystem Act on the fifth date for pleading of May 16, 2018, and the instant disposition is governed by either of the two provisions.