logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.06.24 2015구합20970
영업정지처분취소
Text

1. The Defendant’s disposition of suspending business against the Plaintiff on August 25, 2014 is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 20, 2001, the Plaintiff was a company established for the purpose of waste treatment business, etc., and on November 2, 2005, the Plaintiff established the old-si business establishment using the location of 192-10 U.S. Sinsi-dong.

B. On October 31, 2005, the Plaintiff obtained a license for a final controlled waste disposal business from the head of the Daegu Regional Environmental Office pursuant to the proviso of Article 26(3) of the former Wastes Control Act (wholly amended by Act No. 8371, Apr. 11, 2007; hereinafter “former Act”).

(A) Since then, “the rest of the industrial wastes other than the designated wastes” (hereinafter “general wastes”) were added to the industrial wastes subject to business, the Plaintiff obtained a license for the final waste disposal business from the Defendant on December 26, 2005 pursuant to the main sentence of the same paragraph of the same Article.

(Evidence A. 9). (c)

The Plaintiff extended waste disposal facilities at the Gu-U.S. workplace through multiple changes, etc., and among which four construction sections’ waste disposal facilities are installed, including incidental facilities, such as facilities for the treatment of water and gas incineration, power generation, fuel-making facilities, etc., which are classified into block-type landfill facilities, and both designated and general wastes are classified into a combined landfill site.

On July 30, 2014, the Defendant confirmed on-site waste disposal facilities of the foregoing Section 4 section, and determined that ① the Plaintiff buried waste with non-combustibility waste without separating waste wood, waste synthetic resin, and household waste (hereinafter “reasons for disposal”) and ② the Plaintiff’s daily molding of at least 15cm after completion of reclamation work in accordance with the matters to be observed added at the time of permission (hereinafter “reasons for disposal 2”).

E. On July 31, 2014, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the prior disposition of suspension of business against the violation of the Wastes Control Act (hereinafter “Act”), and the Plaintiff was replaced by the suspension of business on August 13, 2014.

arrow