1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. As prescribed by the Wastes Control Act on October 26, 2005, the Plaintiff is a general waste recycling business entity that has obtained permission for the intermediate disposal business of wastes (food and plant) in the white-si 367-21 (Tancheon-ro) with a total of three facilities, including one damp feed-making facility (this Dong), one by-product fertilizer facility (1 Dong), one by-product fertilizer facility (3 Dong), and one by-product fertilizer facility (3 Dong), etc., and disposes of food and waste.

B. On January 22, 2016, the Defendant issued a prior notice of an administrative disposition on January 26, 2016 and imposed an administrative fine of KRW 10 million around that time on the ground that the Plaintiff violated the standards for smuggling of by-product fertilizers facilities (85 tons/day), which are waste disposal facilities, and failed to meet the management standards.

C. On February 11, 2016, the Defendant: (a) performed testing and operating facilities to conduct pre-use inspections of dry feed-making feed-making facilities, which are waste disposal facilities (hereinafter “instant facilities”); and (b) discharged water pollutants by discharging water pollutants; and (c) Article 31(1) of the Wastes Control Act; and Article 42(1) [Attachment Table 11] of the Enforcement Rule

2. Individual standards:

(c) (3) Article 60 and Article 27(2)12 of the same Act on March 18, 2016 on the ground that the management standards set forth in subparagraph (a)(3) are violated, and Article 83(1) [Attachment 21] of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act on the ground that the management standards set forth in subparagraph (c) are violated;

17) As prescribed in the above, the instant disposition imposed a penalty surcharge of KRW 20 million in lieu of the business suspension period of one month. D. Meanwhile, the Defendant imposed an administrative fine of KRW 3 million as prescribed in Article 68(1)4 of the Wastes Control Act and Article 38-4 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act on the ground that the Plaintiff’s discharge of water pollutants, as seen above, violated matters to be observed by a waste disposal business entity under Article 25(9)4 of the Wastes Control Act, Article 32 [Attachment 8] 1.C. of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, on the ground that the Plaintiff violated matters to be observed by the waste disposal business entity under Article 68(1)4 of the Wastes Control Act and Article 38-4

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion.