The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

Defendant

A The above fine shall be imposed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding 1) The Act on the Conservation of Water Quality and Aquatic Organisms (hereinafter “Water Quality Ecosystem Act”) does not have a clear definition of “discharge,” and there is room to be interpreted as being included in the “discharge” of water pollutants even in the case of “taking” to treat wastewater generated from a small machine as the Defendants. Thus, it violates the principle of clarity inasmuch as it is likely to be included in the “discharge” of water pollutants.

2) The Water Quality Ecosystem Act delegates to the Ordinance of the Ministry of Environment with respect to wastewater discharge facilities, and the Enforcement Rule of the same Act provides that the amount of “one-day maximum amount of wastewater” of the storage facilities attached to the facilities shall be calculated in the case of a machine that reuses water in circulation by deviating from the scope of delegation. Thus, the above Enforcement Rule of the Act deviates from the scope of delegation or violates the principle of prohibition of comprehensive delegation.

3) The Defendants did not know in the instant case that, until the examination result of water quality testing, metal ingredients can be melted by melting in diversh oil, the Defendants were unable to obtain any explanation or notification from administrative agencies during the process of moving a factory in an industrial complex.

Therefore, there is a justifiable reason to believe that the Defendants did not have the intention to violate the law and did not constitute a crime.

B. Sentencing

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principle, there is no specific definition provision regarding the meaning of “discharge” in a somewhat comprehensive and broad definition provision regarding “discharge facilities of wastewater” in violation of the principle of clarity.

Even if the meaning and scope of "discharge facilities of wastewater" under the above Act are compared with the legislative purpose and purport of the Water Quality Ecosystem Act, the content of the prohibition provision, the prior meaning of "discharge facilities", and the concept of "discharge facilities of waste water without discharge", and ordinary sense.