Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who has built a new construction of B ground lending at Namyang-si.

No person shall receive a contract for or execute construction works by lending his/her name or trade name from a construction business operator or lend his/her construction business registration certificate or construction business registration pocket book.

Nevertheless, on August 1, 2016, the Defendant paid 300,000,000 won to the name in the name in the name in the book of mediation of construction registration certificate at the construction site at the construction site at the Namyang-si, Nam-si, and received a loan for all relevant documents, such as the registration certificate of the construction business in the construction site and the contract agreement

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A suspect examination report prepared by the police against the accused (a family relation certificate, a report on commencement of construction works, a standard contract for private construction works, a construction business registration certificate, a business registration certificate, a construction business registration pocketbook, and a complete

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries, such as criminal history;

1. Article 96 Subparag. 3 of the pertinent Act and Article 21 Subparag. 1 of the former Framework Act on the Construction Industry (amended by Act No. 14015, Feb. 3, 2016) on criminal facts and the selection of punishment are apparent that “Article 21 Subparag. 1” is a clerical error in the indictment, and thus, it shall be corrected as above to the extent that it does not materially disadvantage the Defendant’s exercise of his/her right to defense.

Selection of Fines

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

1. The grounds for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act for the order of provisional payment are examined, and the fact that the defendant recognized the criminal facts of this case and reflected his mistake is recognized as favorable circumstances to the defendant.

However, in light of the content and method of the crime and the legislative intent of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry, etc., the crime of this case where the defendant constructed a loan with a construction business registration certificate, etc. is not less than that of the crime, the crime of this case has been punished several times due to the crime of this kind, and the general sentencing in the same and similar cases is subject to the imposition.