When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The defendant is a person who operates the (State)C in Incheon Gyeyang-gu 201.

In order to register a specialized construction business, at least two persons who have acquired technical qualifications in the relevant field under the National Technical Promotion Act, such as civil engineering, construction technology higher than the first level in the mining sector, or the National Technical Qualifications Act.

Nevertheless, on August 19, 2013, the Defendant registered a specialized construction business (soil construction business) at the Gyeyang-gu Incheon Gyeyang-gu Incheon Gyeyang-gu Office, and submitted D’s certificate of qualification as a technician to meet the conditions of two who acquired technical qualifications, and registered the construction business by illegal means.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the Framework Act on the Construction Industry.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on the written accusation;

1. Article 96 Subparag. 1 and Article 96(1) of the former Framework Act on the Construction Industry (Amended by Act No. 11794, May 22, 2013); the selection of fines for criminal facts;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The defendant's assertion of the provisional payment order under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act argues that the punishment for the violation of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry again is against the prohibition against double Jeopardy even though he was punished as a violation of the National Technical Qualifications Act. Thus, the defendant's assertion of the provisional payment order under Article 334 (1) of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry violates the prohibition against double judicata principle. Thus, the crime of giving national technical qualification certificate under Article 26 (3) of

As such, the defendant's assertion that it violates the prohibition against double Jeopardy is rejected.

The reason for sentencing is that the punishment shall be determined in consideration of the balance between the sentencing when the defendant is judged as a violation of the National Technical Qualifications Act and a violation of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry, the criminal records of the defendant, etc.