However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The defendant is a person who operates the main product manufacturing business under the trade name of "C" in Seo-gu Incheon.

1. A person who intends to install a sloping facility with electricity leading lines of at least 300 kmW per hour in violation of the Clean Air Conservation Act, and a sloping facility with power of at least 20 cm shall report the installation of air emission facilities to the competent authority

Nevertheless, the Defendant, without reporting the installation of air discharge facilities to the competent authorities from November 21, 2013 to March 4, 2015, installed and operated 150kmW 1, 250kmW 1, 10-W 1, and 15-ma2.

2. A person who intends to install a sloping with a power violating the Noise and Vibration Control Act exceeding 10 miles shall report the installation of noise emission facilities to the competent authority;

Nevertheless, the Defendant, without reporting the installation of noise emission facilities to the competent authority from November 21, 2013 to March 4, 2015, installed and operated a 10-macul 10-macul 1 and 15-macul 2 devices, which are noise emission facilities.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Application of a part of the Acts and subordinate statutes to site photographs;

1. Article 90 subparagraph 1 of Article 90 of the Clean Air Conservation Act, Article 23 (1) of the same Act, subparagraph 1 of Article 58 of the Noise and Vibration Control Act, Article 8 (1) of the Noise and Vibration Control Act, and the choice of imprisonment, with labor, for the crime;

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes among concurrent crimes (within the scope of adding up the long-term punishments of the above two crimes) under the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects the fact that the defendant is trying to operate a factory with the complete installation of pollution prevention facilities, and it is disadvantageous to the defendant that he was punished for the same kind of crime.