logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.04.01 2014누68517
과징금부과처분취소 등
Text

1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the part against the plaintiff falling under the order to revoke below shall be revoked.

Defendant.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On February 14, 2004, the Plaintiff is a waste disposal business entity that, after obtaining a license for an intermediate waste disposal business from the Defendant, retires and disposes of medical wastes generated from sick sources upon entrustment.

B. As a result of the Plaintiff’s business guidance and inspection on June 15, 2012, the Defendant discovered the fact that the Plaintiff incinerated 16,198 g of the medical wastes entrusted by the hospital for more than one day from the date of receipt of the said medical wastes, and issued a penalty surcharge of KRW 20,00,000 in lieu of one month of business suspension pursuant to Articles 28 and 60 of the Act on July 25, 2012 on the ground of violation of Article 25(9) of the Wastes Control Act (hereinafter “Act”).

C. On August 2, 2013, the Plaintiff inspected the Plaintiff’s place of business, and notified the Defendant of the fact that the Plaintiff was in custody for more than five to fifty (52) days of medical wastes entrusted to the Gangwon-do Hospital, etc. on August 20, 2013. On August 20, 2013, the Defendant: (a) as a result of guidance and inspection of the Plaintiff’s place of business, found that the Plaintiff was in custody of 36 tons of wastes entrusted to the National University, etc. from August 2, 2013 to August 20, 2013; (b) issued a warning disposition in lieu of business suspension pursuant to Article 13 of the Act and Article 7(1)6 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on October 1, 2013; and (c) issued a warning disposition in lieu of business suspension pursuant to Article 25(9) of the Act and Article 30(1)20(d) of the Enforcement Rule of the Act (hereinafter “Enforcement Rule”).

As a result of the guidance and inspection of the Plaintiff’s workplace on September 26, 2013, the Defendant keeps 100 tons of medical wastes entrusted by the Plaintiff at a place other than the permitted storage facilities.

arrow