logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 논산지원 2018.08.10 2018고정34
가축분뇨의관리및이용에관한법률위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who operates a livestock farming business with the permission to install a livestock excreta discharge facility with the trade name of “C corporation” in Masan-si.

No person who raises livestock shall commit an act of discharging or leaving livestock excreta not properly treated, thereby flowing into or threatening to bring livestock into the public waters.

Although the Defendant had a duty of care to frequently check and manage the place of water leakage in a facility for treating livestock excreta, and to treat livestock excreta not to leak, the Defendant neglected to do so on July 10, 2017 due to negligence in the course of business, which discharges approximately 100 litress of livestock excreta to neighboring rivers, which are public waters.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Statement made by the police of D;

1. Site for photograph;

1. Current status of transfer of livestock excreta;

1. The criminal records of the same kind [the defendant and his/her defense counsel] are confirmed to have not been obliged to manage the defendant because the defendant was in a state where operation was suspended by not using the above facilities any longer among the union members, and the defendant was not obliged to manage the defendant; and ② even if not, it was caused by foul waste in E

The argument is asserted.

According to the above evidence, the unprocessed excreta remaining in storage (at least 379 tons) during the suspension of operation of the instant facility had agreed to hand over a certain monthly amount to Cheongsan City Cheongsi. On July 10, 2017, it is recognized that foul waste treated in storage remains at least 73 tons.

According to the above facts, the Defendant had a duty of care to prevent foul waste from being leaked until the remaining foul waste has ceased to exist in the storage of the foul waste after the foul waste has been transferred to the Cheongsi-si.

It is reasonable to view it.

Even if E included excreta in the instant facilities

Even in this case, foul waste is not generated by the storage tank capacity but by the gap of the storage tank.

arrow