logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2016.12.21 2016고단4185
대기환경보전법위반
Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of 6 million won.

Defendant

If A does not pay the above fine, 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

B A Co., Ltd. is a corporation established for the purpose of plastic production and sales, etc. with its place of business in Ansan-si, and the defendant A is the head of the Ansan-si Factory Headquarters of the above company and the general manager of the environmental management of the above company.

1. Defendant A

(a) No business operator shall operate a preventive facility when he/she operates an emission facility of air pollutants or commit any act of emitting pollutants emitted from the emission facility, mixing the air, in order to lower the degree of pollution;

Nevertheless, around 14:00 on August 29, 2016, the Defendant discharged pollutants emitted from emission facilities by mixing the air with the pollutants emitted from emission facilities, in a way that the Defendant, at the above place of business, installed 10 gates inside the joint air pollution prevention facilities (capacity of 580 cubic meters/min) connected to the mixture facility, which are air pollution prevention facilities connected to the air pollution prevention facilities.

(b) A business operator shall, in installing or altering an emission facility of air pollutants, install air pollution preventive facilities to lower the pollutants emitted from such emission facilities below the permissible emission levels;

Nevertheless, the Defendant, at the date and time stated in paragraph (1) of this Article, operated the discharge facility without installing a duct to treat pollutants discharged from the discharge facility, which are air pollution prevention facilities (capacity 580 cubic meters/mination), which are installed in order to lower the permissible emission levels to seven (0.7 cubic meters x 7) out of the 15 air pollutants storage facilities, which are air pollutants emission facilities.

2. Defendant B’s employees, who operated the Defendant’s business as above, discharged pollutants emitted from emission facilities by mixing them with air, and operated air pollutants emission facilities without installing air pollution preventive facilities.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant A’s legal statement 1.

arrow