시정명령취소
The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
All costs of litigation shall be borne by the plaintiff.
1. The Plaintiff sought confirmation of the invalidity of the disposition imposing the penalty points of three points on the ground that the instant disposition was revoked, along with the revocation of the instant disposition, and on January 15, 2018, the second point imposed on the ground that the instant corrective order was issued on January 15, 2018, as well as on November 27, 2017.
The appellate court before remand dismissed the part concerning the disposition of imposing penalty points among the lawsuits in this case, and dismissed the plaintiff's remaining claims while cancelling the disposition in this case.
In this regard, only the defendant was awarded a prize, and the Supreme Court reversed the part against the defendant in the judgment prior to remand, that is, the part regarding the disposition of this case, and remanded it to this Court.
Therefore, the subject of this Court's adjudication is limited to the disposition of this case.
2. Basic facts and circumstances of dispositions.
A. The Plaintiff, etc. is a business proprietor who is not a small and medium business proprietor engaged in civil engineering and construction business under Article 2 subparagraph 7 of the Framework Act on Construction Industry, and is entrusted with the construction of cooling pipe construction, etc. to D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”). Thus, the Plaintiff constitutes a principal contractor under Article 2 (2) subparagraph 1 of the Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act (hereinafter “subcontract”).
D is a small or medium enterprise that conducts machinery facility construction business, etc. defined in Article 2 subparagraph 7 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry, and is a subcontractor defined in Article 2 (3) of the Subcontract Act entrusted by the Plaintiff.
B. The current status of subcontract transactions in the instant case refers to an electrical air-conditioning and heating apparatus with which the Plaintiff is able to carry out air-conditioning and heating, by installing an indoor device outside the building, and installing air-conditioning and heating at the ceiling, with respect to the 17 air-conditioning pipes, multi-temp and EHP sites from June 17, 2010 to July 10, 2012.
The Plaintiff entered into a subcontract for construction works, etc. (hereinafter “direct contract”). Moreover, the system air conditioners and ventilation universal works during the E construction (hereinafter “E.”).