1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that is established on April 26, 2005 and engaged in the manufacturing and distribution business of two parts, bean, etc. in the voice group B (hereinafter “instant place of business”).

B. On March 2, 2018, the Defendant conducted a final inspection of the pollution level of water from the instant place of business (hereinafter “instant inspection”). As a result, the Defendant exceeded the permissible emission level as prescribed by the Water Environment Conservation Act in certain water pollutants items as listed below, and among them, in the case of SS (Suspendlid and suspended oil) exceeding the permissible emission level of at least 60%.

The result of the inspection of the degree of pollution of a violation that exceeds the permissible level (excess items: BOD, COD, SS, T-N, T-P) BOD 1040g/liter (standard: 350) COD 1358.6mg/liter (standard: : 350) S 2840g/liter (standard: 200) TN-8.12mg/liter (standard: : 60) T-P 27.95m/liter (standard: 20)

C. The defendant Na

On March 9, 2018, on the ground that the Plaintiff violated Article 32 of the Water Environment Conservation Act, as stated in the paragraph, Article 105(1) and attached Table 22 of the Enforcement Rule of the Water Environment Conservation Act that provides for the criteria for specific administrative disposition against the Plaintiff to improve the violation by May 31, 2018 pursuant to Articles 39 and 71 of the said Act (the criteria for specific administrative disposition against the breach of the third permissible discharge level).

2. According to the provisions of item (A), the first improvement order, the second improvement order, the third improvement order, the fourth operation suspension order and the fourth operation suspension order are made gradually and phasely, if the workplace located outside the special measures area, such as this case, exceeds the permissible emission levels.

However, the same [Attachment 22] non-high 6. Non-high 6. The second-level criteria are applied to the case where the excess ratio of the permissible emission levels is more than 600%, and in the case of the plaintiff, the order of improvement, which is the second-level criteria, is the case where the excess ratio of the SS is more than 60%.

In rendering disposition, the items that exceed the permissible emission levels shall be the same as the date of implementation of the improvement order.