The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) did not discharge wastewater without permission as stated in the facts charged in this case. The court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case on the grounds of the E’s statement that falls short of credibility. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the circumstances revealed by the court below. ① E is a resting restaurant and a grass field of about 30 to 40 meters away from the final discharge outlet as stated in the court below's judgment, and confirmed that there was no facility or store other than the above resting restaurant in the vicinity. The above statement of E is reasonable and objective, and there is a strong credibility in light of the content of E's statement in itself, as well as the specific and non-specific circumstances to the extent that it is impossible to make a statement without actual experience (the defendant in the trial of the court below).

Although there is no statement, E confirmed the pollutants of the Gu's final discharge in the court of original trial.

In full view of the facts as seen above, the Defendant appears to have resided in the above resting restaurant together with son, and in the above resting restaurant, there was a window connected with water supply inside the restaurant, and the fact that the Defendant operated the above resting restaurant and discharged wastewater without permission, but did not install a private sewage treatment facility. Thus, the Defendant’s assertion of mistake is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so ordered.