2. In light of the legislative intent of the Wastes Control Act to control the generation of judgment wastes and properly treat wastes generated thereby contributing to the preservation of the environment and the improvement of the quality of people's lives, and the legislative intent of the Water Quality and Ecosystem Conservation Act to prevent harm to people's health and the environment caused by water pollution and to properly manage and preserve the water quality and aquatic ecosystems of public waters, such as rivers and lakes, it is necessary to strictly punish the act as stated in its reasoning, which is disadvantageous to the defendant, shall be considered as sentencing materials against the defendant. The defendant is the first offender with no criminal power; the defendant cannot be said to have run the final waste recycling business without reporting and permission; the defendant's business size is small, which shall be considered as sentencing materials favorable to the defendant; the defendant's age, character and environment; the circumstances leading to the crime; the circumstances leading to the crime; and the circumstances leading to the sentencing specified in the arguments in this case; thus, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.