Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

If the Defendants did not pay each of the above fines, 50.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

B A is a person who operates a hole, and Defendant A is a person who manages a hole of Defendant B.

1. On March 14, 2013, Defendant A extracted a hole in the form and carried out screening work, etc., Defendant A laid down a hole of an instigious presium D into the sea adjacent to the Taeyang-Eup in Busan-do, through through through which it was loaded in plastic boxes, and laid down each of the aforementioned unstigtains at the above places on the mar management line D, even on the 17th day of the same month, the same month, the 24th day of the same month, and the 25th day of the same month.

Accordingly, the Defendant discharged wastes from ships.

2. Defendant B, an employee of the Defendant, neglected his duty of due care and supervision to prevent a violation as described in paragraph (1).

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of each statute on photographs;

1. Article 127 subparagraph 1 of Article 127 and Article 22 (1) of the Marine Environment Management Act; Defendant A who selects a fine: Articles 130, 127 subparagraph 1 of the Marine Environment Management Act; Articles 22 (1) and 22 (1) of the Marine Environment Management Act;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for detention in a workhouse;

1. The Defendants and their defense counsel’s assertion of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act regarding the provisional payment order cannot be seen as a waste that can not be seen as a hole of spawn specified in the facts charged in the instant case. Thus, the Defendants asserted that they are not guilty.

Pursuant to Article 2 subparagraph 4 of the Marine Environment Management Act, "waste" means any substance that is unusable in such state when discharged into the sea and that causes or is feared to cause harmful effects on the marine environment.

In full view of the written response to the evidence duly examined by this court, about 50% will be abolished in the normal form.