logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.06.20 2019노704
물환경보전법위반
Text

The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

except that this judgment.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment of the defendant (two months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) of the judgment of the court below is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence against the Defendant of the Prosecutor’s judgment is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. We examine both the judgment and the prosecutor’s arguments.

The following circumstances are recognized: (a) the Defendant led to the instant crime; (b) the Defendant took measures to prevent recurrence, such as obtaining permission for the installation of wastewater discharge facilities, after the detection of the instant crime; and (c) the Defendant has no criminal record of having been punished by the same type of crime or of having been punished by a fine exceeding the fine.

However, the crime of this case was committed in a very poor manner that the defendant installed and operated wastewater discharge facilities over about 11 years without permission, and discharged wastewater including heavy metals, such as human body and environment, into a trial code, which is a public waters through an excellent tool for about 3 months. The defendant did not know that wastewater discharged through an excellent tool flows into public waters at the time of the police investigation, and that wastewater discharged through an excellent tool was included in heavy metals, etc., and did not seem to reflect and reflect the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime were committed. In full view of all the various sentencing conditions shown in the argument of this case, it is deemed unfair that the sentence imposed by the court below is too uneasible.

Therefore, the defendant's argument is without merit, and prosecutor's argument is with merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

Although there is no reason to appeal by the defendant, the decision of the court below is reversed separately by accepting the prosecutor's appeal.

arrow