The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The facts charged in the instant case reveal that the Defendant, the owner of the instant land, was issued an order to take measures to purify contaminated soil from June 12, 2014 to June 12, 2015 (hereinafter “instant purification order”), but failed to comply with the order.

2. The lower court revoked the judgment of the lower court on the ground that the effect of the determination of inconsistency with the Constitution (the Constitutional Court Order 2010HunBa28 dated August 23, 2012) on the part which considers the person who acquired the facilities subject to the control of soil contamination as the person who caused the contamination (hereinafter “the former Act”) among Article 10-3 subparag. 3 of the former Soil Environment Conservation Act (amended by Act No. 1051, Apr. 5, 2011; hereinafter “former Act”) as the person who acquired the facilities subject to the control of soil contamination falls under the category of the person who caused the contamination (hereinafter “the former Act”) and did not comply with the order under Article 10-4 subparag. 3 of the former Act, on the ground that the act of the lower court’s failure to comply with the order under Article 10-4 subparag. 3 of the former Act constitutes the person who acquired the facilities subject to the control of soil contamination constitutes an illegal act of the lower court.

3. Review of the reasoning of the lower judgment and the evidence duly admitted by the lower court reveals the following facts and circumstances.

A. The former Act on the Control of Soil Contamination stipulates that “any person who has taken over the facilities subject to the control of soil contamination” shall be deemed as the person who has taken over the facilities subject to the control of soil contamination, except in cases where the person who has taken over the facilities is in good faith and without fault (Article 10-3(3) and the former Act). An administrative agency may order the person who has caused the contamination to take measures to purify soil (Article 11(3)), and a person who has failed to comply with the purification order shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than two years or by a fine not exceeding 10 million won (Article 29).