beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.05.24 2013고정964

건설산업기본법위반

Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

Defendant

If A does not pay the above fine, 50.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A The representative director of the corporation B and the defendant corporation B are corporations established for the purpose of business in the artificial park construction business.

1. No defendant A subcontractor shall further subcontract any construction work he/she has subcontracted to another person without obtaining written consent of the contractor;

Nevertheless, around July 26, 2011, at the office of Gangnam-gu Seoul, the Defendant subcontracted the part of the tin construction among the “Seoul Metropolitan City Mu Park (remamamama facility) construction” that was ordered by the Seoul Metropolitan Government Urban Infrastructure Headquarters around the end of the end of 2010, and that was awarded a subcontract for the construction of Hancheon Construction Co., Ltd., and then subcontracted the part of the above construction to the Yellow Industries Co., Ltd., Ltd. without obtaining written consent from the contractor.

2. Defendant B, at the above date, at the place, Defendant B, and at the same time, Defendant A, the representative director of the Defendant, committed the above act of violation.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant A’s legal statement

1. Statement of the police concerning the cause;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a written accusation (including attached materials);

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

A. Defendant A: Article 96 Subparag. 5 and Article 29(4) of the former Framework Act on the Construction Industry (amended by Act No. 10719, May 24, 2011; and enforced November 25, 201);

B. Defendant B: Articles 98(2), 96 subparag. 5, and 29(4) of the former Framework Act on the Construction Industry (amended by Act No. 10719, May 24, 2011 and enforced on November 25, 201)

1. Defendant A at a workhouse: Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act or more.