1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On February 5, 2014, the Plaintiff has run a business producing and disposing of sex and soil, which is civil and building materials, by recycling wastes, such as obtaining a renewal of a comprehensive waste recycling business license under Article 87-12 at the seat of the Gyeonggi Ethical City, and crushing wastes subject to business.

B. On June 9, 2015, the Defendant issued an order cancellation of a comprehensive waste recycling business license and to dispose of wastes on the ground that the Plaintiff buried incineration materials at the site of civil engineering works, in violation of the permitted matters, even though the Plaintiff was a place of business that is able to produce raw materials or road auxiliary equipment materials for the required products by recycling incineration materials.

[Ground of recognition] The entry of Gap evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole argument

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The terms and conditions of permission renewed on February 5, 2014 by the Defendant include civil and building materials in the labeling column of recycled products. The nature and molding materials constitute civil and building materials, and thus, even if the Plaintiff buried in the site of incineration, it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff violated Article 8(2) of the Wastes Control Act even if they buried in the site of civil and construction works. According to the results of the treatment of inorganic civil petitions conducted on June 21, 2012 by the Ministry of Environment and the Plaintiff’s response to inquiries to the Ministry of Environment around October 2012 by taking into account the following: (a) recycled products are deemed as civil and building materials used at more than 50 percent in weight in the content of the permission that was renewed on February 5, 2014; and (b) as such, the Plaintiff’s response to the effect that the comprehensive waste recycling business can be conducted as civil and building materials for incineration residues, and thus, the disposition of this case was unlawful by mixing the Plaintiff’s construction of aggregate and mold.