Nevertheless, the Defendant, without obtaining permission for change on December 18, 2012, filled up 250 tons of cumpedspedspingspingspingspingspingspingspingspingspingspingspingspings (hereinafter “the instant gender land”).

2. It is a question whether the Defendant’s act constitutes “the change of the purpose or method of recycling” of the instant braille waste disposal company under Article 29(1)3(b) of the Enforcement Rule of the Waste Management Act (hereinafter “the instant waste”).

According to the statement of the certificate of report on waste recycling issued by the head of the Busan and Jinhae Free Economic Zone Authority (paragraph 7, and paragraph 91 of the investigation records), the purpose of recycling permitted by the Defendant is to “reutil wastes with embling materials, such as metal, wood, waste, etc., by mixing them with the general earth and sand (not less than 50%) after removing them from the screening facilities.”

However, the facts charged of the instant case merely stated that “the Defendant filled the instant land by using the instant wastes without obtaining permission,” which is irrelevant to the change of the use or method of recycling wastes (only there is a possibility of changing the complex business place). Unlike the purpose and method of using the permitted wastes, there is no evidence to acknowledge the fact that the Defendant used the instant wastes by any method other than removing foreign substances, such as metal, wood, waste, etc., from the screening facility, mixing them with the general soil and sand (at least 50%) and embling them with studs.”

Therefore, the facts charged in the instant case constitute a crime.

3. The defendant shall be acquitted in accordance with the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.