On September 4, 2019, the Defendant imposed penalty points on Plaintiff A, Plaintiff B, and Plaintiff C.

Details of the disposition

On December 24, 2015, the Defendant entered into a contract for the construction work of H apartment (hereinafter “instant construction work”). On January 26, 2016, the Defendant entered into a contract with a joint water-level company (hereinafter “Plaintiff A”) comprised of Plaintiff A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and Plaintiff B (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) on the construction work of the instant construction work with the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) on December 24, 2015.

Plaintiff

C performed the above service contract as a construction project management technician belonging to the Plaintiff A.

E entered into a subcontract on April 20, 2016 with I and the instant construction site (construction works with soil and water, sewage, and soil). Pursuant to the said subcontract, I removed sand from the site of the instant construction works from the outside.

In the first site of the instant construction site, the private land was released to Kimpo-po, and on April 27, 2016, the J Corporation issued the Defendant a notice that it was inappropriate for the Defendant to bring in the I’s private land on the ground of “the concrete and plant ppuri mixing and non-conformity with the entry standards.”

Accordingly, E requested the Defendant to change the private land to three "L block, M block, and Incheon Port N" at the K-owned water reclamation site and three places (L block, M block, and Incheon Port N), and the Defendant approved the change of the private land on June 7, 2016.

E submitted relevant documents, such as the ledger of removal of private land, to the Plaintiff Company, by dividing the private land generated at the site of the instant construction project into four sites of the above-mentioned branch office.

In 2018, the Defendant carried out the instant construction site “specific audit on the actual condition of the implementation of external sand in 2018,” and as a result of the audit, even though approval was granted for the change of the content of removal of the instant site from 246,428 cubic meters in the instant construction site to the public waters reclamation site, the Defendant actually carried out only 135,343 cubic meters, and the remainder of the land was as listed below.