Before a criminal trial becomes final and conclusive on the act of lending a building business license, whether to revoke the building business license (affirmative)

When it is deemed that the act of leasing a construction business license by a constructor violates Article 52 (1) 5 of the Construction Business Act, the constructor's license may be revoked, and the decision on the violation shall not be superior.

Articles 16-2, 52(1)5, and 60 subparag. 4 of the Construction Business Act

Attorney Shin Jin-jin, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

The Minister of Construction and Transportation

Seoul High Court Decision 88Gu2474 delivered on April 3, 1989

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The Plaintiff’s attorney’s ground of appeal is examined.

1. Examining the evidence adopted by the court below in light of the records, it is sufficient to find that the plaintiff lent the plaintiff's construction business license to the non-party 1, non-party 3, non-party 540 building companies, as stated in the judgment of the court below, and therefore, it is groundless to argue that the court below erred by the

2. The argument is that the court below erred in finding that the plaintiff violated Article 52 (1) 5 of the Construction Business Act because the plaintiff's act was against the above Article 52 (1) of the Construction Business Act in the course of the previous proceedings, even though the judgment on the facts that the plaintiff lent a construction business license and received the rent, such as the decision of the court below, and therefore, the court below judged that the plaintiff's act was against the above Article 52 (1) 5 of the same Act. However, as long as the plaintiff's act is deemed to violate the above

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)