logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2014.08.29 2013고정2610
건축법위반
Text

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Any person who intends to build a temporary building shall report to the head of the competent local government in accordance with the retention period, standards and procedures prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Nevertheless, on April 15, 2013, the Defendant installed two containers with a size of 40 square meters and 10 square meters for the purpose of using them as an office without reporting to the competent authority on the land of Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Incheon.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on the written accusation;

1. Article 111 Subparag. 1 and Article 20(2) of the former Building Act (Amended by Act No. 12246, Jan. 14, 2014) on criminal facts

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. As to the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order, the Defendant and the defense counsel did not know that the Defendant should report the establishment of the instant container to the competent authority separately. Rather, the lessor of the instant leased site knew that the procedure was completed normally, and thus, did not have any awareness of intention or illegality.

However, according to the records of this case, although all matters pertaining to the permission to use the leased site of this case as the vehicle storage are stipulated to be responsible for the lessee, the defendant can be found to have installed the container without permission without permission without examining at all the head of the competent local government on the matters related to the permission. Thus, the defendant did not have intention to violate the Building Act

It is difficult to deem that there is no perception of illegality or illegality.

Therefore, we cannot accept the above argument of the defendant and his defense counsel.

arrow