The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that of the lower court’s imprisonment with prison labor for not less than ten months, which is unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the defendant is the first offender, and the defendant does not seem to have committed the crime of this case as an employee of Corporation D who entered into an environmental facility entrustment contract with F Co., Ltd., and the defendant does not seem to have committed the crime of this case, and it does not seem that the defendant has any special benefits from the crime of this case, and it is recognized that wastewater discharged by the defendant flows into sewage terminal treatment sites, not

However, as in the instant case, environmental crimes not only are serious crimes causing enormous social costs, but also damage to the environment, such as water quality and aquatic ecosystems, are hard to recover by itself, and it is very difficult to detect the cause that they are closely committed, and there is a need to strictly punish the Defendant because it is very difficult to detect the crime of this case. However, in light of the statement made by the investigation agency and the attitude in the court, it is the question of whether the Defendant acknowledges all the crime of this case. In addition, considering the amount and period of wastewater discharged by the Defendant without operating preventive facilities, the Defendant’s punishment against the Defendant cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is too difficult to view that the Defendant’s punishment is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.