1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 25, 2013, the Plaintiff was incorporated as a company on March 25, 2013, and completed the registration of construction business for steel and concrete construction business on April 26, 2013.

B. On April 20, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition to cancel the Plaintiff’s registration of construction business pursuant to Article 83 subparag. 5 and Article 21(1) of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff leased the Plaintiff’s trade name to B, who is a non-licensed constructor, and caused B to undertake construction of reinforced concrete construction works among C works ordered by Samsan Construction Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant construction works”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Evidence No. 1-1, 2, Evidence No. 3, Evidence No. 3-1, Evidence No. 6-1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (non-existence of grounds for disposition) directly calculated and reviewed the subcontract price, etc., and entered into a contract for the construction of this case with the KCAB, dispatched a field agent to manage and supervise the progress of the construction work, and during the construction process, the Plaintiff recruited and executed the son’s own invitation and input by the Plaintiff.

In addition, when claiming progress payment, the field agent directly confirmed the status of the contribution, and examined the status of the construction progress with the field agent in the Sejong Special Metropolitan City Development Bank, and received progress payment from the plaintiff's account and directly remitted labor cost and material cost to the personnel and material account.

As such, the Plaintiff was actually involved in the entire process of supply and demand and execution of the instant construction, the instant disposition that determined that the Plaintiff leased the name of the construction business registration to B to have the instant construction work executed is unlawful.

B. It is as stated in the attached Form of the relevant statutes.

C. Article 21 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry prohibits another person to receive or execute a contract by using his name or trade name.