Man in His 60s Who Buried Heavy Metals on His Own Land Cleared of Charges... Prosecution: "Intent Hard to Recognize"

Prosecution issues no-charges decision for insufficient evidence... "Causation hard to recognize"
Daeryun LLC: "The client was a good-faith victim deceived by fraudulent acts"

A landowner in his 60s who had been under investigation on charges of illegally burying contaminated soil on his own land has received a decision of no charges from the prosecution.

According to the legal community on the 8th, the Pyeongtaek Branch of the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office issued a no-charges decision for insufficient evidence in May for Mr. A, who had been suspected of violating the Soil Environment Conservation Act.

Mr. A was accused of conspiring with a construction contractor to bury soil greatly exceeding the soil contamination concern standards for cadmium, copper, lead, zinc, and others in the process of carrying out earthwork on his own land in 2022.

Although the investigation began following a problem raised by the corporation that purchased the land in July of the following year, Mr. A denied the related charges. This was because he had merely concluded an earthwork contract with the construction contractor and others to sell the land and did not know that contaminated soil had been buried.

Mr. A argued, "At the time, the construction contractor's side said they were using recycled soil permitted and managed by the city hall, and I firmly believed this."

In response, the prosecution judged it difficult to see that Mr. A had intent or conspired regarding the illegal burial. It was confirmed through statements of related persons that a construction company official had actually shown Mr. A an official document from Pyeongtaek City Hall and explained that it was lawful, permitted recycled soil.

In addition, the prosecution stated, "Although contaminants were detected in an appraisal conducted in 2025, this was an inspection carried out more than two years after the earthwork," finding it difficult to recognize a causal relationship between the contamination result and the burial act at the time.

Choi Han-sik, attorney of Daeryun LLC representing Mr. A, explained, "In environmental criminal cases, whether the actor clearly recognized the contamination and whether there was intent are the core of establishing the crime," and "We proved that the client was a good-faith victim deceived by the other party's fraudulent acts, and demonstrated that it is difficult to conclude a causal relationship between the burial act at the time and the contamination based solely on the belatedly issued appraisal result."

He added, "By presenting the possibility of a third contamination source through prior inspection materials, we were able to obtain a no-charges decision."

Reporter Lee Sil-yu lsy0808@kyeonggi.com

[Read the full article]
Man in His 60s Who Buried Heavy Metals on His Own Land Cleared of Charges... Prosecution: "Intent Hard to Recognize" (Go to link)