1. The Defendant’s business suspension disposition against the Plaintiff on October 16, 2015 shall be revoked for one month.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is running the business of collecting and transporting industrial waste (animal residues) after obtaining permission from the Defendant for the business of collecting and transporting wastes.

B. As a result of an on-site investigation, a public official affiliated with the voice group confirmed that the Plaintiff did not directly transport the living area (hereinafter “the instant wastes”) generated from the AFF Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”) to a recycling place on September 17, 2015, and did not directly transport the animal residues generated from the AFF Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”) to a recycling place, and that the said mobilization maintenance was allowed to transport the wastes to a recycling place.

C. On October 16, 2015, the Defendant: (a) deemed that the foregoing Plaintiff’s act constituted re-entrustment of the transport of wastes prohibited under Article 25(9) of the Wastes Control Act; (b) Article 32 of the former Enforcement Rule of the Wastes Control Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Environment No. 637, Jan. 21, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply); and (c) rendered a disposition of business suspension for one month (hereinafter “instant disposition”) in accordance with Article 27(2)8 and Article 60 of the Wastes Control Act; and (d) Article 83(1) [Attachment 21] of the former Enforcement Rule of the Wastes Control Act.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 9 (including branch numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. It is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff’s act of disposing of the instant wastes using the Plaintiff’s collection vehicle on the vehicles for mobilization and maintenance, a general waste recycling business entity, which is capable of collecting and transporting wastes on its own pursuant to Article 25(6) of the Wastes Control Act, constitutes the Plaintiff’s act of collecting and transporting the instant wastes on the vehicles for mobilization and maintenance. Accordingly, as alleged by the Defendant, the Plaintiff