All appeals filed by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendants' factories of this case are not discharge facilities which produce specific substances harmful to water quality, such as water, waste play, clean oil, etc., and thus, the court below found the defendants guilty of the facts charged of this case in error of mistake of facts and misapprehension of

B. Each sentence of the lower judgment (a fine of KRW 5,00,000, and each suspended sentence) against the Defendants by the prosecutor is deemed too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine the Defendants’ assertion. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the number of water in the raw water wastewater of the factory of this case taken on May 13, 2013 was detected 0.015 g/L, 0.031 g/L, 0.017 g/L, and chrode 0.017 g/L respectively, and the number, biphenyl, and chloropags are specific substances harmful to water quality as prescribed by the Enforcement Rule of the Water Quality and Aquatic Ecosystem Conservation Act and the Enforcement Rule of the same Act. According to the above facts of recognition, it is reasonable to deem the factory of this case is a specific substance harmful to water quality. Accordingly, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

B. We examine the prosecutor's assertion. The court below suspended the sentence against the defendants in consideration of the following: (a) the specific substances harmful to water quality discovered in the primary wastewater of the factory of this case are small quantities; (b) the specific substances harmful to water quality discovered in the final discharged water are not detected in the final discharged water; (c) the defendants A were the primary offenders; and (d) the defendants were unlikely to repeat a crime with the permission for the installation of discharge facilities after this case; and (b) considering all matters concerning the sentencing specified in the records and arguments of this case, the court below's determination of each sentence against the defendants is proper

3. Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit, and all of them are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.