건설산업기본법위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.
1. The gist of the grounds of appeal is as follows: (a) C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) operated by the Defendant (hereinafter “C”) was practically involved in the supply and demand and execution of the instant construction, taking into account the following: (b) the process of concluding the instant contract and the subcontract; (c) the receipt of the payment of the contract amount; (d) the process of the subcontracted construction; (e) the Defendant’s actual involvement in the subcontracted construction; (e) the Defendant’s position at the site; (e) the act of embezzlement and subcontract
It is reasonable to view that the facts charged in this case, which violated Article 21 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry, have been proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.
shall not be deemed to exist.
However, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged and the judgment of the court below 1) The defendant is the representative of C, a corporation established for the purpose of civil engineering and construction work contract business.
On April 2014, the Defendant: (a) obtained a construction business license of F from F in the real estate office operated by E in Daegu Jung-gu, Daegu-gu, and (b) obtained a construction business license of F in amount to KRW 90,50,000,000 ($ 4,000,000,000,000,000), and (c) had F perform construction work of H building, which is the total floor area of F received from G, the main owner of the building, with the total floor area of KRW 2,881.68,00,000,000,
Accordingly, the defendant had F execute construction works using the name or trade name of C.
2) The lower court determined that the Defendant was guilty on the following grounds, comprehensively taking account of each of the evidence as indicated in its judgment.
A) The contract for the construction work and the special agreement for the awarding of the contract of this case was drafted without the consent of the defendant after the conclusion of the contract.
shall not be deemed to exist.
(B) (1) The construction of a new commercial building after removing the existing building on the Ist ground of Daegu Jung-gu.