Defendant

E shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

Defendant

If E does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

J is the actual operator of K, and Defendant E is an architect.

No certified architect shall allow another person to provide an architectural service, such as matters concerning the investigation and appraisal of buildings, by using his/her name, or lend his/her certificate of qualification to another person.

Nevertheless, from February 2004, Defendant E, instead of receiving two million won each month from the J from February 2, 2004, had the J used Defendant E’s name to provide a certified architect service, and the J operated the building office with the trade name “K” from February 2004 to June 27, 2016, such as being delegated with the certified architect service by using Defendant E’s name.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant E’s legal statement

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspect of the police against J;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (the agreement on the lease of real estate and attachment of a detailed statement of ordinary deposit transactions);

1. Relevant Article of the Act and subparagraphs 3 and 10 of Article 39-2 of the Act on the Private Participation in Construction of Judicial Punishments for Facts constituting an offense;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act was about 12 years, lending the name of an architect, and the benefit gained in return is not specified.

In addition, the lending of a certified architect's name can not be deemed to be a crime connected to the safety of the building, and it is also an unfavorable sentencing factor.

However, it is decided as per the disposition in consideration of the fact that the crime is recognized, the architectural office is closed, the elderly is difficult to expect the ability to pay a fine.

Parts of innocence

1. Facts charged;

A. Defendant B and Defendant D are the actual operator of “M”, and Defendant D is an architect.

No certified architect shall allow another person to provide an architectural service, such as matters concerning the investigation and appraisal of buildings, by using his/her name, or lend his/her certificate of qualification to another person.

Nevertheless, Defendant D is the defendant D on 2010.