Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

A supplier shall subcontract his/her business to a constructor who has registered the type of business corresponding to the details of construction.

The defendant is a actual manager of C Co., Ltd. for the purpose of general construction and civil engineering works, at C Office in Daegu Northern-gu, Seoul on October 3, 2013, and the same year.

9. 27. 27. The contractor entered into a subcontract for construction works with a contract amount of KRW 1,517,400,000 to F who did not register construction business with respect to the entire process of new construction works for multi-household housing located in Yeongdeungpo-si and three parcels of land, namely, Youngcheon-si Co., Ltd., Ltd.

Accordingly, the Defendant subcontracted the type of business corresponding to the construction work to a constructor who did not register.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the defendant's legal statements;

1. Part of the protocol concerning the examination of the suspect against the defendant;

1. Part of each protocol concerning the suspect examination of the police against the defendant or F;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on construction contracts and subcontracting contracts;

1. Relevant Article of a crime and subparagraph 4 of Article 96 and Article 25 (2) of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry Selection of Punishment (Selection of Penalty) concerning a crime;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that "after entering into and cancelling a subcontract with the F Department, the F Council served as a field warden."

In other words, the following facts or circumstances recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, namely, ① the Defendant made a subcontract agreement with F and prepared a subcontract agreement, but later made F and F have the subcontract cancelled and work F as a site warden with the knowledge that F had no license. However, F was made to enter into a subcontract contract with F and implement it as a site complaint.

Since then, the complainant did not pay the advance payment to the complainant.