(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.05.24 2016고정2451

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.05.24 2016고정2451

주택법위반

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is an employee of D Co., Ltd., the managing body of Busan Jin-gu apartment (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”) and managing the apartment of this case.

Where the management entity of multi-family housing intends to destroy or damage incidental facilities or remove all or part of the relevant facilities, he/she shall obtain permission from the head of the competent Gu or file a report thereon, but the defendant, without obtaining permission from the head of the competent Gu on September 5, 2015, has committed a violation of the Housing Act concerning the affairs of D, which is the management entity of the apartment of this case, such as removing the guard room of the apartment of this case and the 116 neighboring fences.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. A written statement;

1. Police investigation report (with respect to telephone conversations withG personnel H);

1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel regarding a copy of each standard contract for technical services and a copy of the removed drawings

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that ① is subject to the penal provisions of Articles 98 subparagraph 6 and 42 (2) of the former Housing Act (amended by Act No. 13474, Aug. 11, 2015; hereinafter referred to as the "this Act"). The defendant, who is only the managing director of the company D, a managing body of the apartment of this case, is not subject to the crime of violating the Housing Act, and ② The 115 Dong Guard room of this case (hereinafter referred to as the "bridge of this case") and the 116 neighboring wall of this case (hereinafter referred to as the "bridge of this case") are merely incidental facilities, not apartment houses, and thus, they cannot be deemed subject to the report and report of this case, and ③ even if the guard room of this case and fence of this case are minor matters subject to the report of this case under Article 42 (2) of this Act and Article 42 (2) of this Act, they cannot be deemed as minor matters subject to the report of this case.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2016.01.13 2015고정4536

-인천지방법원 2017.08.10 2016고정2641

-서울북부지방법원 2016.04.27 2016고정555

-대전지방법원 천안지원 2016.06.23 2016고정193

-광주지방법원 2017.05.12 2017고정424