The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

Defendant

A The above fine shall be imposed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Clean Air Conservation Act, the Enforcement Decree thereof, and the Enforcement Rule thereof impose a duty to report on a person who intends to conduct business using non-dried emission facilities. As Defendant A operated in a dry manner without filing a prior report, using mination facilities, which are air pollutants emission facilities operated by Defendant B corporation, the above act of Defendant A constitutes a person who uses the emission facilities without filing a report under Article 90 subparagraph 1 of the Clean Air Conservation Act

Nevertheless, since the court below acquitted the charged facts of this case, it erred by misapprehending the legal principles on mistake of facts and the order of the Clean Air Conservation Act.

2. Determination

A. Defendant A is a co-representative of the B Co., Ltd. in the instant facts charged. Defendant B is a corporation established for the purpose of mine business and other mining business, etc.

(1) A person who intends to install a discharge facility of a defendant must obtain permission from the competent authorities or report it to the competent authorities.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, without reporting to the competent authority from March 4, 2013 to May 15, 201, operated the instant company’s place of business, using a 75-mam-year 1, 120-mam-year 1, 200-mam-year 1, which is air pollutants emission facilities, in a dry manner.

(2) Defendant B, a representative of the Defendant, committed a violation under Paragraph (1) in relation to the Defendant’s business.

B. As to the judgment of the court below, the defendants are deemed to have reported the discharge facilities under the Clean Air Conservation Act after obtaining permission for waste disposal business under the Wastes Control Act, and there are insufficient data to acknowledge that the defendants arbitrarily changed the crushing facilities, and the instant crushing facilities fall under the "fire-proof facilities" and do not fall under the emission facilities under the Clean Air Conservation Act.