beta
Text
Defendant
A A Fine of 5,00,000 won, Defendant B Co., Ltd. of a fine of 2,000,000 won, Defendant C of a fine of 3,000 won.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
A is a person who operates B from March 11, 2010 to Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-gun, and Defendant C is a public official belonging to the Ma-gun, Ma-gun, Ma-gun, who has performed on-site supervision over K during the construction ordered by the Ma-gun in 2011.
1. Defendant A
A. On May 9, 2011, the Defendant subcontracted the said construction work after receiving a contract for “K” from Ma-gun with the said stock company B as the contractor (21,143,900 won for construction work) from the Ma-gun, which is operated by LA around October 201, and after deducting 20 percent of the construction cost from the commission fee from MA, which is operated by LA around October 201.
Accordingly, the defendant, as a constructor, subcontracted all of the contracted construction works to another constructor.
(b) A constructor shall assign at least one construction engineer to a construction site for the execution management of construction works and other technical management;
Nevertheless, the Defendant submitted to the Martial-gun Office an on-site agent to assign the construction engineerO as a field agent at the construction site of the above Section 1-A, which was located in the N from May 13, 2011 to November 21, 2011, and did not assign a construction engineer at the construction site of the above Section 1-A.
2. Defendant B, at the date, time, and place under the above paragraph 1-A, the representative director A engaged in the act identical to the above paragraph 1-A in relation to the Defendant’s business.
3. On November 26, 201, Defendant C entered the office in charge of Preferred to as the name of construction: K, construction supervisor: C, and the main business: “C” on November 21, 201, the main business of which falls under the category of “construction supervision” as the title “place of construction supervision” using the computer of the above office, although the Defendant had not visited the said office and supervised the construction work on November 21, 201, at the construction site of the above paragraph (1).