1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Details of the instant disposition

A. On January 14, 2008, the Plaintiff is a corporation that runs a general waste recycling business upon obtaining permission for a comprehensive waste recycling business license from the Defendant on September 14, 2010 for the alteration of the content of food waste and plant residues subject to waste disposal.

B. On January 27, 2015, the Defendant’s business suspension disposition issued against the Plaintiff on the ground that: (a) the Plaintiff constructed a new warehouse building in Yong-Gun B or C (hereinafter “each of the instant warehouse buildings”) that was not permitted as waste disposal facilities; and (b) brought in and disposed of food wastes to each of the instant warehouse buildings constitutes an alteration of the matters subject to permission without obtaining permission for alteration of important matters prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Environment (the construction of a waste recycling facility) among the matters permitted; (c) on the ground that the person who obtained permission for a waste disposal business constitutes an alteration of the matters subject to permission without obtaining permission for alteration; (d) Articles 25(11) and 27(2)10 of the former Wastes Control Act (Amended by Act No. 13411, Jul. 20, 2015; hereinafter the same shall apply); and (e) Articles 29(1)3 and 83(1) [Attachment 21(a) through 25-14(a) of the Enforcement Rule of the Wastes Act (hereinafter the same).).

C. On March 12, 2015, the Defendant: (a) on March 12, 2015, in the process of providing guidance and inspection to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant guidance and inspection”); (b) on March 12, 2015, the Defendant discovered that D’s drivers affiliated with Sung-ju Environment, who load and unload food wastes on each warehouse building of this case (hereinafter “instant violation”).

The defendant's disposition of this case brought the plaintiff on April 6, 2015 according to the results of the guidance and inspection of this case, food wastes into each warehouse building of this case, which was not permitted as waste disposal facilities through the violation of this case.