1. Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the above sentence shall be executed for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

[2017 Highest 1288] Defendant A is the representative of B Co., Ltd. (in-house director) located in D at the Gyeonggi-si, and Defendant B is a corporation for the manufacture, etc. of leather, and Defendant B is not a corporation for the purpose of manufacturing, etc., and a business entity is not required to install facilities that can discharge water pollutants flowing into water pollution prevention facilities without passing through the final outlet or without passing through the final outlet for discharge.

1. On October 12, 2016, Defendant A, at around 06:30, discharged water-quality pollutants into pipes installed in neighboring E factories using the mother and heading, without going through the final discharge outlet, at the place of business, B, which is located in Gyeonggi-si, Gyeonggi-si, and Jeju-si, and without going through the final discharge outlet.

2. Defendant B, a representative of the above workplace, committed a violation as described in paragraph (1) with respect to the Defendant’s business at the time and place described in paragraph (1).

[2017 Highest 1750] Defendant A is the representative (in-house director) of Company B located in Gyeonggi-si, and Defendant B is a corporation for the manufacture, etc. of leather; and Defendant B is not a corporation for the purpose of manufacturing, etc. of leather; and a business operator shall not commit an act of discharging water pollutants exceeding the permissible emission levels by failing to normally operate discharging facilities and prevention facilities without justifiable grounds.

1. The Defendant, at around 10:00 on January 5, 2017, Defendant A, at the place of business located in G in Gyeonggi-si, failed to normally operate the gas tank, which is the phase prior to the final discharge outlet, in which the width of COD is 65.7mg/liter (based on 50mg/liter). The Defendant, at around 10:00, introduced approximately 200m of wastewater, the wastewater concentration of which is 157mg/liter (based on 40mg/liter) into neighboring rivers.

Accordingly, the defendant does not have a justifiable reason to install emission facilities and preventive facilities.