logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 부천지원 2013.08.08 2012고정1948
폐기물관리법위반
Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of 2.5 million won.

Defendant

A fails to pay the above fine, 50,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) is a corporation established for the purpose of waste disposal business, such as the production of raw materials made of recyclable plastics or its products, and Defendant A is the representative director of the Defendant Co., Ltd.

1. Although a person who intends to operate a waste disposal business has to obtain permission from the head of the competent administrative agency, the defendant did not obtain the above permission, the defendant engaged in a waste disposal business, such as collecting waste synthetic resin from another place of business within the place of business of the defendant company located in Kimpo-si from January 1, 2012 to August 11, 2012, using 2 melting facilities, which are waste disposal facilities, and re-production of synthetic resin as raw materials through a series of processes.

2. The Defendant Company committed the act of violating the Wastes Control Act in relation to the duties of the Defendant Company at the same time and place as the preceding paragraph.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ partial statement

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Application of accusation, on-site photographing statutes;

1. Article 64 subparagraph 1 of Article 64 of the Wastes Control Act and Article 25 (3) of the Act on the Control of Wastes, comprehensively, Defendant Company who is a fine and Defendant Company who is selected to commit a crime: Article 67, subparagraph 1 of Article 64, and Article 25 (3) of the Wastes Control Act as a whole;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for detention in a workhouse (Defendant A);

1. The Defendants’ assertion on the assertion by the Defendants under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is arguing that the Defendants’ business was not subject to permission under the Waste Management Business Act, since they created the final products using recycled products. However, according to the evidence as seen earlier, the waste plastics using the final products as a raw material does not in itself be deemed as a raw material that can be reusable, recycled, reusable, or recycled. Thus, it cannot be deemed as a recycled product under Article 7 of the above Act.

arrow