The Supreme Court rendered the 105-Tai-Shang-2372 Criminal Decision on September 22, 2016 (the “Decision”), which held that unlawful disposal of wastes refer to disposing and treating wastes on behalf of another without the relevant permits, and whether this was done repeatedly is not a requisite for the offense.
In this matter, the lower court originally found the defendant-appellant, who was engaged in the transportation of industrial waste dirt with no scrap value, to have instructed unwitting drivers to illegal transport and dump the dirt. As a result, the appellant was ruled to have been an accomplice in the unlawful disposal and treatment of wastes under Article 46, Subparagraph 4 of the Waste Disposal Act for failure to obtain the relevant permits to dispose and treat wastes pursuant to Article 41, Paragraph 1 of the same. The appellant filed for the appeal arguing that the offense is not constituted because it had only occasionally engaged in such dumping and not in a routine, repeated manner,
According the Decision, the element of the offense of unlawful disposal of wastes under the first part of Article 46, Subparagraph 4 of the Waste Disposal is the disposal of or treatment of wastes without obtaining the relevant waste disposal and treatment permits pursuant to Article 41, Paragraph 1 of the same law. The nature of the offense contemplates routine and repeated conduct by the offender, so repeated conduct is only considered as a single crime; however, the offense do not require the offender to be running a business, as it is sufficiently constituted once the offender engaged in the disposal and treatment of wastes on behalf of another without the proper permits, and no finding of repeated conduct is required. As a result, the Decision dismissed the appellantÕs appeal for lack of basis in law.