1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) add to the judgment on the plaintiff's argument in the trial of the court of first instance as stated in Section 7 of the judgment of the court of first instance as stated in Section 2; (b) use not more than section 4 "paragraph 3" as stated in Section 3 below; and (c) use the attached Form of the judgment of the court of first instance as stated in Section 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act as it is.

2. Determination on the additional argument in the trial

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: (a) the Defendant imposed a fine for negligence of KRW 3 million on the Plaintiff on April 29, 2015; (b) the disposition of the suspension of business on May 29, 2015; (c) the disposition of the suspension of business on December 30, 2015; (d) the disposition of the suspension of business on April 1, 2016; (e) the disposition of the suspension of business on April 1, 2016; and (e) the disposition of the revocation of the permission of the comprehensive waste recycling business on August 24, 2016; and (e) thus, (e) the Plaintiff has a legal interest in seeking the revocation of the disposition of the instant suspension of business.

B. The instant disposition of business suspension is based on the violation of the facility management standards by an installer of waste disposal facilities under Article 31 of the former Wastes Control Act and the disposal based on the violation of the standards and methods for recycling wastes under Article 13-2 of the same Act.

On the other hand, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 19 and No. 16, the disposition of a fine for negligence of KRW 3 million on April 29, 2015 among the above dispositions asserted by the Plaintiff and the disposition of business suspension of May 29, 2015 was imposed on the grounds of the violation of the obligations of waste disposal business operators under Article 25(9) of the Wastes Control Act, and Article 60 of the Wastes Control Act and Article 83(1) [Attachment Table 21] of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act.