건설산업기본법위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal of this case (legal scenarios) is that each of the crimes of this case was committed under the single and continuous criminal intent of the defendant, and thus the statute of limitations has not expired, despite the absence of the part for which the statute of limitations has expired, the court below acquitted each of the crimes of this case on the grounds of the violation of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry from January 26, 2008 to February 9, 2008 on the ground that the statute of limitations has lapsed.
2. The facts charged and the judgment of the court below
A. The Defendant is a person who engages in wholesale and retail business with the trade name “B”.
Around January 31, 2009, the Defendant entered into a contract for the interior painting work of KRW 18,710,000 for the construction work without registering the construction business at D High Schools located in Dong-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Seoul, Seoul, for a period of 10 days from that time until February 9, 2009.
From around that time to May 30, 2010, the Defendant carried out construction works worth KRW 86,108,90 in total without registration of construction business, as shown in the attached Table of Crimes.
B. The lower court’s judgment: (a) the Defendant was to perform construction work after receiving a written estimate from the school; and (b) the painting Nos. 1 from January 26, 2008 to the same year, from January 26, 2008.
2. The construction work carried out up until September, 200, and thereafter after January 31, 2009, there is an interval of one year. According to the following facts, the construction work by the [Attachment Table No. 1] No. 1 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry cannot be deemed to continue to exist under the criminal intent of a single and continuous criminal intent with the subsequent construction work. Thus, there is a substantive concurrent criminal relationship.
This part of the prosecution was filed after the expiration of the five-year statute of limitations, and the prosecution was acquitted on the violation of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry of the attached Table 1.
3. Determination on the grounds for appeal
A. The former Framework Act on the Construction Industry (amended by Act No. 10719, May 24, 201).