A. Defendant A is a person who operates D established for the purpose of construction business.

On March 2012, the Defendant used the name D (State) in building B102 in Songpa-gu Seoul, Songpa-gu, Seoul, and had a building work for urban-type residential housing in Eunpyeong-gu, Seoul using the name D (State).

B. Defendant B, as in the preceding paragraph, built the construction work of the above urban residential housing in the name of the State D.

2. Determination

A. In a criminal trial, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving the facts constituting the crime prosecuted, and the conviction should be based on the evidence of probative value, which makes the judge feel true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, the defendant is suspected of guilty.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

Article 21 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1151, Jul. 22, 2010). “Act of allowing another person to perform construction works using his/her name or trade name” prohibited under Article 21 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry means a case where the other person knowingly consented or understood to use his/her trade name or trade name for the same purpose with the knowledge that he/she will perform construction works by using his/her trade name or trade name.

As such, all or most of subcontracted construction works in the name of any constructor were executed by any other person.

Even if the constructor himself/herself has been awarded a contract for actual involvement in the construction work, and has been actually involved in the construction work, it cannot be viewed as a lending of name, and whether the constructor has actually participated in the construction work, ① the details and consideration of the supply and demand of the construction work, ② whether the constructor has given and received the contract.