logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.03.28 2017노3327
건설산업기본법위반
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, while operating a small man-made company, can do construction work with the construction work of 150 square meters or less as stated in the judgment of the court below, without registering with the competent authority, under Article 9 of the Framework Act on Construction Industry.

Since the defendant believed that the crime of this case was committed by mistake of law under Article 16 of the Criminal Code, or there was no intention of the defendant.

B. Sentencing

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of legal principles, Article 16 of the Criminal Act provides that his act of his act shall not be punishable only when there is a justifiable ground for misunderstanding of legal principles. It does not mean a simple case of the site of law, but it is generally accepted that his act constitutes a crime but it does not constitute a crime under the law in his own special circumstances, and that he shall not be punishable if there is a justifiable ground for misunderstanding of such misunderstanding of legal principles. The circumstance that the defendant's act of misunderstanding that his act of misunderstanding that his act does not constitute a crime under the law is merely a site of the law, and in particular, it is not a crime permitted under the law.

The defendant's assertion of misunderstanding the legal principles is without merit, since it is not a case of active perception, and it cannot be deemed an act due to a mistake of law, and at least dolusent intent is sufficiently recognized in light of the defendant's career, construction period and contents.

B. As to the unfair argument of sentencing, there is no record of punishment for the same crime, currently there is no risk of re-offending because the defendant was not engaged in work related to construction, and the defendant's injury caused by the crime of this case is more favorable circumstances, but on the other hand, it is sound in the construction industry to ensure quality and safety through proper execution of construction works.

arrow