영업정지처분취소
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On January 14, 2008, the Plaintiff, etc., obtained permission from the Defendant for a comprehensive waste recycling business, and obtained permission for a change on September 14, 2010 to treat food wastes and plant residues as a subject matter of waste treatment, and B agricultural partnership (hereinafter “B”) obtained permission for a comprehensive waste recycling business from the Defendant on July 14, 1998, and obtained permission for a change on October 11, 2007 to conduct a comprehensive waste recycling business.
B. On November 26, 2014, the Defendant: (a) conducted guidance and inspection with respect to the Plaintiff and B (hereinafter “instant guidance and inspection”); (b) determined that the goods, which flown out of the water from the water from the field to the ground (hereinafter “the instant land”) of Yong-nam Cancer C (hereinafter “instant land”) was the wastes produced by the Plaintiff.
C. As a result of the instant guidance and inspection, the Defendant’s business suspension disposition: (a) contaminated the surrounding environment on December 22, 2014; (b) did not complete the composting process on the ground of the instant land on December 21, 2014; (c) did not 5,000 tons of intermediate processed wastes (e.g., getting out of Nowoncheon for a long time; and (c) caused malodor and leaked water; and (d) violated Article 25(9) of the Wastes Control Act; (c) [Attachment Table 8] Articles 32(1) and 32(4)(j) of the Enforcement Rule of the Wastes Control Act on the ground that the Defendant violated Article 27(2)8 and 60 of the Wastes Control Act; (d) [Attachment Table 21] Article 83(1) [Attachment 21] 2(a) and 12(b) of the Enforcement Rule of the Wastes Control Act; and (e) disposed of the instant disposition “from January 5, 2015”
D. D.
On December 23, 2015, the prosecutor of the Gwangju District Prosecutors' Office who filed a prosecution against the plaintiff shall provide the plaintiff with regard to the leakage of the water taken out by the guidance inspection of this case.