The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding and legal principles 1) The instant clothing collected and transported by the Defendant does not constitute a dangerous substance for environmental pollution, which has a significant impact on the natural environment and living environment and requires strict control of the discharge, as used value and exchange value, and does not constitute “a substance which has become unnecessary for human life” under Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Wastes Control Act, and it does not constitute “waste” under Article 46(1)3 of the Wastes Control Act and Article 66(6)8 of the Enforcement Rule of the Wastes Control Act, since there is no possibility of causing environmental pollution in the course of collecting or opposing it.

2) The Defendant committed an act of collecting and transporting clothes in trust with the competent administrative agency’s response, such as the planning officer of the Ministry of Environment and the officer in charge of the Ministry of Environment regarding the issue of whether he/she constitutes an abandoned clothes. However, there was no choice but to believe that his/her act does not constitute an act of collecting and transporting wastes subject to reporting, and there was a justifiable ground for misunderstanding. Therefore, the Defendant cannot be punished

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of misunderstanding the facts and legal principles 1) The Defendant asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal under this part of the judgment below, but the court below rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the above assertion on the following grounds: (a) on the basis of the evidence duly admitted and examined, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the charges in this case; and (b) on the other hand, rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the ground of detailed reasons under the title “determination on the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion.” In addition to the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the instant clothing in this case is stipulated under Article 46(1)3 of the Waste Management Act.