logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.10.06 2015노2154
건설산업기본법위반
Text

All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal, G and Y’s statement, etc., the remainder of the instant construction work is Defendant A, and G is deemed to have granted a license loan fee to Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”). On the other hand, L’s statutory statement in the lower court, which seems consistent with the Defendants’ assertion, is doubtful in light of various circumstances, and its credibility is doubtful. Accordingly, according to the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, the fact that Defendant A lent Defendant C’s license from Defendant C and performed the remainder of the construction work

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The instant charges No. 1) Defendant B is the representative director of the C Co., Ltd. located in Suwon-gu, Busan. The constructor should not allow another person to receive or perform construction works using his/her name or trade name. Nevertheless, on September 7, 2012, the Defendant had A perform construction works using the name of the said C Co., Ltd.’s office in Busan-gu, Busan-do. (2) The Defendant should not be able to receive or execute construction works using the name or trade name of another constructor.

Nevertheless, from September 7, 2012 to November 201 of the same year, the Defendant used the name of C Co., Ltd. to perform the new construction work of multi-family housing under the said paragraph.

3) On September 7, 2012, the Defendant C, the representative of the Defendant, committed an offense against the Defendant’s business as above. B. The lower court, based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, acknowledged the following facts. (1) Defendant C suspended construction work due to the failure to pay construction cost during construction of G’s building owner’s H ground construction of G’s H ground.

After that, G and Defendant A.

arrow