The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The act of raising livestock, which is subject to punishment under Article 50 subparag. 3 of the Act on the Management and Use of Livestock Excreta, is merely raising livestock by using a facility installed with a false or other unlawful means, and the act of raising livestock by using a unreported discharge facility is not subject to punishment, but is not subject to punishment, but is in violation of the principle of no punishment without a law.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 2.5 million won) is too unreasonable.
A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, Article 50 Subparag. 3 of the former Act on the Management and Use of Livestock Excreta (amended by Act No. 12516, Mar. 24, 2014; hereinafter “the Livestock Excreta Act”) provides that “a person who installs a waste-generating facility or raises livestock using the waste-generating facility without filing a report in violation of Article 11(3) or by filing a report by false or other unlawful means.” This is interpreted to be subject to punishment both by concurrently stipulating that even based on the language and text itself, installation of a waste-generating facility without filing a report, installation of a waste-generating facility after filing a report by false or other unlawful means, and act of raising livestock using the waste-generating facility illegally installed in such a manner.
In addition, in cases where the Livestock Excreta Act intends to install livestock excreta-generating facilities at a livestock breeding place in excess of a certain size in order to recycle or dispose of livestock excreta appropriately to clean the natural environment and living environment and to reduce water pollution, it shall obtain permission or file a report, as prescribed by Acts (Article 11), and the facility operator who has obtained such permission or filed a report shall meet the standards prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry