벌점부과처분취소
1. On August 11, 2016, the Defendant’s disposition of imposition of defective penalty points against the Plaintiffs is revoked.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.
Details of the disposition
Plaintiff
On January 9, 2012, 2012, the Yan Forest Comprehensive Engineering Corporation (hereinafter “Plaintiff Pung Forest Comprehensive”) and the Plaintiff’s architectural office (hereinafter “Plaintiff Construction Foundation”) concluded a service contract with the Defendant for responsible supervision of “C District 1 apartment complex construction work” (hereinafter “C District 1 construction work”), which was executed by the Defendant, and the Plaintiff A supervised the construction of the said apartment as a construction project technician.
Plaintiff
On January 2, 2012, 2012, the Plaintiff UF Engineering Engineering Engineering Firm (hereinafter “Plaintiff UF Engineering”) ordered between the Defendant and the Defendant, and entered into a service contract on responsible supervision of “C District 3, 5, and 7 Apartment Construction Work” (hereinafter “FF”) performed by Korea AFF Company, and the Plaintiff B supervised the construction of the said apartment.
The Defendant, on August 11, 2016, had changed from the outer wall of each apartment building on the ground that the Plaintiffs performed supervision without modification of specifications, on the ground that the construction method was changed to that the construction method was executed by EPS mixing crowdfunding rather than stone transactions as stated in the initial specifications. The Defendant, in this court, conducted supervision without modification of specifications despite the change of construction method, and Article 87 [Attachment 8] of the Enforcement Decree of the Construction Technology Promotion Act of the most similar construction technology as the grounds for the instant disposition did not exist because there was no provision directly planning the progress of supervision without specifications.
5.2
2.1 Specifys that the penalty points was imposed on the basis of the "many of phased verification as to whether construction has been conducted in accordance with design documents and various standards."
As follows, each of the plaintiffs was given penalty points (hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of this case").
As a result of the results of the participation ratio of the construction-based disposal, the first construction project management service provider with 60% of the total of 0.6 points for disposition is changed.