1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court, such as accepting the judgment of the court of first instance, shall be dismissed as “establishment” under the five pages of the judgment of the court of first instance, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for supplementing or adding the judgment as follows 2. Thus, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article

2. Supplement and addition of judgments;

A. The plaintiff is not identical to Article 62 (2) 3 of the Water Quality Ecosystem Act and basic facts of Article 62 (2) 5 of the same Act, which are the grounds for disposition by the defendant, and therefore, attached Table 22 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act.

2. G. 21) The disposition of business suspension under Article 64(2)3 of the Water Quality Ecosystem Act is null and void on the ground of no legal basis, and the installation of the instant pipelines does not constitute a case where the wastewater treatment business is performed in bad faith by intention or gross negligence. According to the facts acknowledged in the judgment of the court of first instance cited by this court, the instant disposition was conducted in accordance with Article 62(2)5 and Article 64(3)2 of the Water Quality and Ecosystem Act (in a case where the matters to be observed under Article 62(2) are not performed) on the ground that the Plaintiff “the Plaintiff installed pipelines not required for wastewater treatment” on the ground that “the Plaintiff installed pipelines not required for wastewater treatment,” and the Plaintiff’s assertion on the other premise is without merit.

B. The Plaintiff also asserts that, in light of various circumstances, malodorous substance transfer pipes and the instant pipes do not constitute wastewater discharge facilities.

As the instant disposition was issued on the ground that the “Pipe pipes not necessary for wastewater treatment” were installed, the issue of whether malodorous substance transfer pipes or the instant pipes connected to the instant pipes constitute wastewater discharge facilities is not directly related to the instant disposition, as well as not only the instant disposition.