The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

Defendant

A The above fine shall be imposed.

1. Improper sentencing for each of the reasons for appeal;

2. The crime of this case was committed by installing and operating discharge facilities that discharge specific water-quality harmful substances in an area where the installation of wastewater discharge facilities is limited for the preservation of water quality. The crime of this case is not negligible in light of the purport of the relevant statutes in order to prevent harm to public health and the environment caused by water pollution and to properly manage and preserve water quality and aquatic attitudes.

In addition, as required by a prosecutor on the grounds of appeal, it is recognized that a prosecutor has been engaged in the work using non-acceptanceed oil even with only permission for the use of non-acceptanced oil, and that the scale of operation is significant.

However, taking into account the following factors: (a) Defendant A led to the commission of the waste treatment business to the waste treatment business entity without discharging externally, and instead treating the anti-nets, etc. caused by the use of the water by cutting off the acceptance level; (b) the current relevant ministries are reviewing the mitigation of the restriction on the location of discharge facilities; (c) Defendant A’s age, sexual behavior, environment, motive and means of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime; and (d) the punishment of the lower court against the Defendants is somewhat unreasonable in light of the following factors: (a) Defendant A’s age, sexual behavior, environment, motive and means of the crime; (b) Defendant A did not have any criminal conviction exceeding the same kind of criminal record and fine.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act as the defendants' appeal is with merit, and the judgment below is reversed, and it is again decided as follows through pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are identical to the facts stated in each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 75 subparagraph 2 of the Act on the Preservation of Water Quality and Living Together and Article 33 (5) of the Act on the Protection of Water Quality and A of A who is selected to commit a crime;