beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1. Purport of the claim.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, such as accepting the judgment of the court of first instance, is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the relevant part of the judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows 2. Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of
2. On the two pages 18, the following is added to the revised parts. The place of business of this case is not within the malodor control area under the Malodor Prevention Act, but is not designated and publicly announced separately from the defendant as the subject of reporting on the emission of malodor under the same Act (Provided, That the place of business of this case was designated and publicly announced as the subject of reporting on September 1, 2016, after the disposition of this case
(1) The former Wastes Control Act provides that the purpose of the Act is to contribute to the preservation of the environment and the improvement of the quality of people's lives by controlling the generation of wastes to the maximum extent possible and disposing of generated wastes in an environmentally friendly manner (Article 1). While the former Wastes Control Act defines wastes as substances no longer necessary for human life or business activities (Article 2 subparagraph 1), it does not apply to gaseous substances not contained in a container, etc. (Article 2 subparagraph 1).
(1) Article 3(1) of the Wastes Control Act provides that a waste disposal business entity shall comply with the matters to be observed under Ordinance of the Ministry of Environment (Enforcement Rule of the Wastes Control Act, i.e., the disposal of entrusted wastes, i., the disposal of wastes lest environmental pollution should be caused. Meanwhile, the Wastes Control Act amended by Act No. 13411 on July 20, 2015 and enforced from July 21, 2016, which was amended by Act No. 13411 on July 20, 2016, does not stipulate that the malodor itself constitutes wastes and does not constitute the grounds for the disposal thereof, but rather violates the provisions of Article 3(1).