(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.08.11 2016고정691

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.08.11 2016고정691

건축법위반

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

No one shall extend, remodel or reconstruct the total floor area of not more than 85 square meters without reporting to the Special Self-Governing City Mayor, a Special Self-Governing Province or the head of a Si/Gun/Gu.

Nevertheless, on April 17, 2014, the Defendant extended 4 units of a panel structure equivalent to 14.38 square meters in total without reporting to the Government Mayor in Dong-si, 205 and 206 Dong-si.

Accordingly, the defendant did not report to the Government Mayor and extended the total floor area of less than 85 square meters.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Inspection of actual conditions of urban residential housing, etc.;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserts that the photographic image (the defendant and his defense counsel have been extended at will only by E, a sales agent, and that there was no extension by the defendant.

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence of the judgment, the defendant comprehensively delegated the authority to conclude a sales contract under the premise that the contractor consents to the extension work if he wishes to do so and that the contractor would have deducted the cost of the extension work from the sales price in the process of concluding the sales contract by delegation by the defendant (if he does not want it), and that the contractor wishes to do so, the extension work was performed by E upon ordering the contractor, but the defendant was responsible for the cost of the extension work, and the defendant did not raise any objection to E, the defendant was aware that the contract was comprehensively entrusted to E with the authority to conclude the sales contract under the premise that the contractor consents to the extension work if he wishes to do so, and that the extension work can be performed by individual sales contract.

Therefore, it is reasonable to see that E voluntarily performed extended construction work, and it is reasonable to see that the defendant, the main owner of the building of this case, decided whether the extended construction work of this case.

Therefore, the facts charged in this case are as follows.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2016.03.31 2016고단179

-부산지방법원 동부지원 2013.08.12 2012고정1663

-춘천지방법원영월지원 2020.10.20 2020고정62

-부산지방법원 동부지원 2016.10.28 2016고정976

-수원지방법원 평택지원 2015.04.02 2014고정842