logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2018.10.29 2018고정139
수질및수생태계보전에관한법률위반
Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

Defendant

If A does not pay the above fine, 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is a representative director of Defendant B, in all times, who exercises overall control over the overall business of the workplace, and Defendant B is a corporation established for the purpose of metal processing business, etc.

1. A person who intends to install wastewater discharge facilities, the maximum volume of wastewater per day of which exceeds 0.1 cubic meters, shall file a report on the installation of wastewater discharge facilities with the competent administrative agency under the conditions as prescribed by Presidential Decree, and shall not install the discharge facilities without filing a report or after filing a false report, or operate the facilities using the discharge facilities;

The Defendant, at the foregoing workplace from March 19, 2015 to April 19, 2017, installed metal processed products, water quality, and hydrobiotics from the foregoing workplace, which fall under wastewater discharge facilities, [Attachment Table 4] 2, 63] of Article 6 of the Enforcement Rule of the Act on the Conservation of Water Quality and Aquatic Ecosystem [Attachment Table 4] 2, 63] of the former Enforcement Rule of the Act on the Conservation of Water Quality and Aquatic Products (Classification 25 to 31 as a standard industry classification not otherwise classified], and operated the same using the waste discharge facilities, without reporting the installation of wastewater discharge facilities to the southdo, the competent administrative office, in total, 1.04 cubic meters of 0.26 cubic meters (1 meter, 0.08 cubic meters, 1 meter, 0.39 cubic meters, 1 meter, 0.31 cubic meters).

2. The Defendant Company B, at the time and place specified in paragraph 1, committed the Defendant’s act of violation as prescribed in paragraph 1 in relation to the Defendant’s business.

Summary of Evidence

1. The Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. A public official's statement;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;

(a) Defendant A: Articles 76 Subparag. 2 and 33(1) of the former Water Quality and A Conservation Act (Amended by Act No. 14532, Jan. 17, 2017; hereinafter the same shall apply)

B. Defendant B Co., Ltd.: Articles 81 and 76 subparag. 2 of the former Water Quality and Water Quality Conservation Act.

arrow