Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

2. Determination

A. On the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of all the charges of this case on the grounds that the evidence alone submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that the so-called "confidential pipelines for discharging wastewater" are installed by connecting the wastewater into the sprink, the air-conditioning pipe pipe and the air-conditioning pipe pipes connected to the water tank flowing into the wastewater, and the low-point pipe pipe for discharging wastewater, and the water flow control pipe pipes for discharging wastewater respectively, or there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge that each pipe installed the so-called "confidential pipelines for discharging wastewater" that the wastewater flows into the prevention facilities without passing through the final outlet, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise, and that the charges of Defendant A discharged water pollutants flowing into the prevention facilities without passing through the final outlet on February 6, 2018 and March 8, 2018 are sufficiently proven to the extent that reasonable doubt was excluded.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower court’s judgment based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, closely comparing the records of the instant case, the lower court’s determination is just and acceptable, and the lower court’s judgment is final and conclusive.