Defendant

A fails to pay the said fine.

Defendant

A is the representative of Co., Ltd. B at the time of harmony, and Defendant B is a corporation established for the purpose of metal surface disposal business.

1. A person who intends to install discharging facilities of a defendant shall obtain permission from the Minister of Environment, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, and shall not conduct any business using discharging facilities without obtaining such permission;

Nevertheless, from January 2018 to July 2018, the Defendant, without obtaining the aforementioned permission from the place of business of the said stock company B, carried out operation using three equipment for the production of metal processed products, which are specific substances harmful to water quality, such as copper (u), leadh, water (hg), 3 equipment for the production of metal processed products, which are wastewater discharge facilities generating hg, 1 equipment for landing, 1 equipment for landing, 1 equipment for salting facilities, 1 equipment for salting facilities, 8 equipment for watering facilities (the maximum daily waste volume of 61.2 cubic meters).

2. Defendant B, at the same time and time as in paragraph (1), the Defendant, a representative of the Defendant, committed the above violation in relation to the Defendant’s business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. A written accusation;

1. A certificate to collect samples;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes as a result of examining pollution level of wastewater;

1. Article 75 subparagraph 1 of Article 75 of the Water Environment Conservation Act and Article 33 (1) (Selection of Fine): Defendant B, a stock company, who has the option to commit a crime: Article 81, subparagraph 1 of Article 75, or Article 33 (1) of the Water Environment Conservation Act;

1. Defendant A at a workhouse: Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: Taking into account the fact that the Defendants’ reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act reflects the crimes, the Defendants did not have the same criminal records, and the Defendants’ workplace was closed.