logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.12.18 2017노5402
건설산업기본법위반
Text

Defendant

C The appeal by the Prosecutor and the appeal by the Prosecutor are all dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant C’s punishment (an amount of KRW 10 million) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s each sentence (Defendant B: a fine of KRW 3 million; Defendant C: the same as the above, Defendant D: a fine of KRW 6 million) that the lower court sentenced the Defendants is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In this case, even if Defendant C is not a constructor, the crime of this case is likely to cause serious social problems, such as defective construction works, etc., in that it is a multi-family housing constructed upon lending another person’s construction business registration certificate, and the crime of this case is not easy.

In addition, the above defendant has a criminal record of the same fine.

On the other hand, the defendant C showed the attitude of recognizing and opposing his mistake, and acquired a construction business license after the case.

Considering the above circumstances unfavorable or favorable to Defendant C, and the above age, sex, environment, and all other conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, the sentence imposed by the court below against Defendant C does not seem to be too heavy or unreasonable because it is within the reasonable scope of sentencing discretion.

Therefore, the above argument by the defendant C and the prosecutor is without merit.

B. In this case, even if Defendant B and D are not a constructor, the crime is not somewhat weak in that the aforementioned crime is likely to cause serious social problems, such as defective construction works, etc., by leasing another person’s construction business registration certificate.

However, on the other hand, the above defendants have shown the attitude of recognizing and opposing their mistakes, and the above defendants did not have the same kind of criminal record.

As above, the above defendants B and D were disadvantageous or favorable to them, and the age, sex, environment, and others of the above defendants.

arrow