2. B;

Where a defendant A fails to pay the above fine, the defendant A shall be confined in a workhouse for a period calculated by converting 100,000 won into one day.

To order the Defendants to pay an amount equivalent to the above fines.

1. Defendant A

The defendant is the representative of the fire-fighting facility construction supervision corporation B in Busan Dong-gu D and the second floor.

A person who has registered a fire-fighting system construction supervision business shall faithfully perform the fire-fighting system construction supervision duties by guiding and supervising whether the construction of fire-fighting systems, etc. conducted by the construction business operator complies with design documents and fire safety standards

Nevertheless, from June 16, 2015 to October 8, 2015, the Defendant performed the fire-fighting facility construction supervision work for “FF vehicle warehouse” in the Dong-gu Daejeon-gu Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, by failing to place 12 fire-fighting equipment units on the ground level and attach 12 fire-fighting equipment units, thereby violating the fire safety standards of fire-fighting equipment and automatic fire-fighting equipment. ② The Defendant was constructed in violation of the fire safety standards of sprinkler because he did not carry hedging between the ceiling and the apartment inside the warehouse office, and ③ the installation of a sprinkler in violation of the fire safety standards of automatic fire-fighting equipment and submitted a report on the result of fire-fighting supervision as appropriate without guiding and supervising the fire safety standards of automatic fire-fighting equipment, which violated the fire-fighting safety standards of automatic fire-fighting equipment.

2. Defendant B

The defendant was a corporation established for the purpose of designing and supervising service business of fire-fighting equipment and registered as a fire-fighting supervision business.

A, the representative director of the defendant, performed the fire-fighting facility construction supervision duties on the warehouse of FF motor vehicles as above in the date, time, and place of the business of the defendant, in a false manner.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Reports on violations of fire-fighting-related statutes;

1. The police statement in G;

1. Investigation report (main) (Voluntary submission of a full certificate of registered matters and a business registration certificate);

Application of Statutes

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

(a) Defendant A: Subparagraph 3 of Article 36 and Article 16 (1) 5 of the Fire-Fighting System Installation Business Act;

(b) Defendant B: Articles 39, 36 and 16 (1) 5 of the Fire-Fighting System Installation Business Act;

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Defendant A: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Defendants: Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Reasons for sentencing

The fact that a crime is recognized and is against the law is advantageous to the fact that the crime in this case is committed is committed under the circumstances that the purpose of legislation of the fire-fighting system installation business to ensure the sound development of fire-fighting system business and to ensure the safety of the public from fire, and that the crime cannot be deemed to be light. In addition, the punishment, such as the order, shall be determined in consideration of all the sentencing conditions specified in the arguments