벌점 부과처분 취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. From November 1, 2008 to December 31, 2010, the Plaintiff, a company engaged in the building supervision business, etc., performed supervision over the construction of old-style apartment at 1020 o-gil 32, Namyang-si, Yangyang-si, Yangyang-si, which was executed by the original comprehensive construction company (hereinafter “original comprehensive construction”). On December 31, 2010, the Defendant approved the use of the old-style apartment on the premise of the Plaintiff’s completion report.
B. On May 30, 2016, at around 18:00, 105, 1603, 105-dong 1603 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) caused an accident that collapses in the ceiling (hereinafter “instant accident”).
C. On July 7, 2016 after conducting a safety inspection, etc., the Defendant imposed three points of penalty points on the Defendant pursuant to Article 53 of the Construction Technology Promotion Act, Article 87 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and Article 47 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act on the following grounds:
(hereinafter “instant disposition”). In the case of the instant apartment that collapsed in the ceiling of the cadastral content, the construction of the instant apartment was to be carried out in a 100-meter range different from the design drawings and specifications. Although the floor slab, which is a major structural structure, was attached to the lower part of the unit of the unit heat, concrete (2.5m x 3.0m x 0.1m in thickness) has to fall, the contractor and the supervisor did not perform the supplementary construction, thereby resulting in a fall-off accident after the pre-use inspection.
The plaintiff filed an administrative appeal, and the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the plaintiff's appeal on February 13, 2017.
[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence 1, 13 evidence, Eul evidence 2 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 is that the instant accident occurred far after the cement paint entered the lower part of the concrete straw at the time of loading concrete, and thereafter, the instant cement paint is far away. Article 87(5) of the Enforcement Decree of the Construction Technology Promotion Act is applicable.