logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 천안지원 2014.12.12 2014고정968
건축법위반등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 8,000,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Violation of the Building Act;

(a) A person who intends to construct or substantially repair a building shall obtain permission from the Special Self-Governing City Mayor or the head of a Si

Nevertheless, the Defendant started the construction on November 25, 2010 and obtained approval for use on July 8, 201, without permission, built three-story buildings of the size of 411 square meters in the size of D floor area in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu without permission. From September 201 to October 10 of the same year, the two-story units of 132.61 square meters in size were 4 households; the three-story units of the same area were built as 4 households; the three-story units of the same area were built as a boundary wall between households removing the door of the school living room; and the three multi-family units of the same household were built as a multi-family house of eight households in addition to the two units.

(b) Where any person intends to extend a building with a total floor area of at least 85 square meters, he/she shall obtain permission from the Special Self-Governing City Mayor

Nevertheless, the Defendant, at the time and place indicated in the above paragraph (a), removed stairs going up from the third floor without permission, built the fourth floor of reinforced concrete structure, installed the fourth floor of reinforced concrete structure, and extended one household for residence of 128.86 square meters by installing a room, toilet, main room, and outside entrance.

2. Notwithstanding the fact that the Defendant violated the Parking Lot Act should establish one annexed parking lot per household with respect to the above multi-family house at the same time and place as that of paragraph (1), the Defendant did not establish one-six-year annexed parking lot for the added six households after substantial repair and extension in the above way.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Investigation reports (Attachment of protocol for reference of public official in charge);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the inspection table of each building site;

1. Relevant provisions of the Building Act and Articles 108(1) and 11(1) of the Building Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of punishment, and Articles 29(1)1 and 19(1) of the Parking Lot Act.

arrow