All of the appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence imposed by the court below on the Defendants is too unfasible and unfair.

2. The act of discharging water pollutants discharged from the discharge facilities without flowing them into the prevention facilities causes water pollution, and thus, it is necessary to strictly punish them. However, at the same time, Defendant A taken over the instant place of business from G on December 24, 2012. At the time of acquisition, one of the instant places of business was installed in order to discharge the discharge facilities into the prevention facilities and to discharge them into the excellent manle, instead of one of the discharge facilities at the time of acquisition. The Defendant alleged that the instant Defendant was not in operation at the time of the instant inspection, and that there was a risk of environmental pollution due to detection of water pollutants that do not exceed the permissible discharge standards as a result of the water quality inspection of the collected samples. At present, the Defendants’ completion of the installation of the discharge facilities’ remuneration and the installation of the discharge facilities and its normal operation after completion, and all of the sentencing conditions stated in the instant records and arguments, such as character and conduct, environment, the process and means of the crime, as well as the consequences

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