The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the purpose of legislation, etc. of the Act of this case and related provisions, Article 89 of the Clean Air Conservation Act which punishs a person who installed emission facilities without permission is also punished by negligence, and even if the defendant was unaware of the occurrence of specified hazardous air pollutants in the emission facilities of this case and there is no intention to do so, the defendant neglected to confirm the occurrence of specified hazardous air pollutants in spite of his/her duty of care to prevent the occurrence of specified hazardous air pollutants in the emission facilities of this case, and thus, the defendant can be found as negligence. Thus, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the charges of this case without any negligence is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and by

2. Determination

A. The facts charged 1) Defendant A is the representative director of Company B located in Gumisisi. Any person who intends to install emission facilities generating specified hazardous air pollutants shall obtain permission from the Mayor/Do Governor. On December 9, 2013, the Defendant installed air emission facilities without obtaining permission from the Mayor/Do Governor even though the occurrence of 0.97 pmpm of hydrogen, which is a specified hazardous air pollutant, and 0.06 pmpm of hydrogen, occurs in the process of producing Maineium in excess of Maineium at the factory of the foregoing Company B, the Defendant, the representative of Defendant B, committed an act in violation of the foregoing provision with respect to the Defendant’s duties at the same time and at the same place.

B. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, the lower court determined that it is reasonable to view that Defendant A was aware of the fact that the relevant hazardous air pollutants, which were specified hazardous air pollutants, were generated at the factory of Defendant B Co., Ltd. after December 9, 2013, and that Defendant A was not guilty of the facts charged in this case.