logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2015.01.23 2014고정1190
폐기물관리법위반등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who performs removal works after being entrusted with the overall removal works from the LH Corporation in Gyeyang-gu Seoul Housing Site Development Zone in Goyang-gu.

No one shall, in accordance with the Wastes Control Act, dispose of wastes in any place or place other than facilities, such as a Special Self-Governing City Mayor, Special Self-Governing Province Governor, the head of a Si/Gun/Gu, or the manager of a facility, such as a park and a road, and no person shall throw

Nevertheless, on April 2014, the Defendant has been deprived of approximately 180 tons of soil contaminated by mixing industrial wastes, such as waste oil, waste oil bars, construction waste, etc., generated during the process of removal from D in the early housing site development zone, on 12 occasions through two 15 tons of dump trucks in the same C Housing Site Development Zone.

Summary of Evidence

1. Court statement of the defendant (the second court date);

1. Application of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, such as a related photograph, location map, soil contamination level examination, detailed soil survey, and order and publication of purification measures;

1. Subparagraph 1 of Article 63 of the Wastes Control Act and Article 8 (1) of the same Act concerning facts constituting an offense, subparagraph 5 of Article 29 of the Soil Environment Conservation Act and subparagraph 1 of Article 15-4 of the same Act (the point of dumping contaminated soil);

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime for the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, including the fact that: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime for the purpose of temporary termination of the occurrence of civil petitions arising from existing wastes; (b) the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime; (c) the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime against the mistake; (d) the fact that he/she was working to implement the corrective order, such

arrow