beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 천안지원 2014.07.22 2014고정557

폐기물관리법위반

Text

Defendant

A A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000 and by a fine of KRW 2,000,000, respectively.

Defendant

A above.

Reasons

Criminal facts

Defendant

A is the head of the planning office of the defendant B corporation established for the purpose of manufacturing aggregate and manufacturing and transporting ready-mixeds.

No one shall dispose of wastes in any place other than those prepared by a Metropolitan Autonomous City Mayor, a Special Self-Governing Province Governor, the head of a Si/Gun/Gu, or the manager of a facility, such as a park

1. Notwithstanding Defendant A, Defendant A, at the request of Party C, intended to dispose of inorganic sludge, which is a commercial waste from the place of business that occurred at the time of manufacturing DNA, without permission, at the place of business of Party B, in response to the request of Party C for the high pollution of soil to be filled in the lower land. Defendant A disposed of the foregoing in a manner of raising 153 cubic meters of inorganic sludge from March 20, 2014 to 17:00, on the land of Party D and E, Dong-gu, Dong-gu, Dong-gu, and Party E without permission.

2. Defendant B Co., Ltd. discarded the above inorganic sludge without permission at the same date, time, and place as above, Defendant B Co., Ltd.’s employees.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant A’s legal statement

1. The F and G statements, and written confirmation of violations;

1. Request for accusation against a person who violates the Wastes Control Act;

1. Application of statutes on field photographs;

1. Defendant B corporation under Article 63 subparagraph 1 of the Wastes Control Act and Article 8 (1) of the same Act concerning criminal facts: Article 67 of the Wastes Control Act;

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

1. The amount of inorganic contamination, which has been discarded without permission for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, of the provisional payment order, is reasonable. However, after the prosecution of this case, it appears that the Defendants collected and recovered them after the prosecution of this case, and that the Defendants do not have the same kind of power, etc., the sentence like the order shall be determined