beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On June 24, 2013, the Defendant ordered D Performance Improvement Work (hereinafter “instant design service contract”) to Company B (hereinafter “B”) and Company C (hereinafter “C”) (hereinafter “C”) (hereinafter “instant design service contract”), and the Plaintiff is a construction engineer in charge of the said design service as an employee B.
B. On August 29, 2014, B and C completed design services under the instant design service contract. On the bridge design part of the design drawing (hereinafter “instant design drawing”), the patent (registration number F; hereinafter “instant extinguished patent”) was used for the construction method of installing temporary bridge (TRIS) of E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) registered as of June 10, 201 (hereinafter “E”), but on the bridge design part of the design specifications (hereinafter “instant design specifications”), the patent number (registration number G) of E’s “the instant alternative patent”).
C. After the audit and inspection of the instant project, on September 21, 2017, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Audit Committee: (a) prepared B (the Plaintiff in charge of the instant project) and C’s design drawings for the Defendant as “TTRAS method; (b) submitted design drawings and specifications specifying other patent construction methods; and (c) confirmed that the construction works were in violation of Article 87(5) [Attachment 8] [Attachment 8] of the Enforcement Decree of the Construction Technology Promotion Act; and (d) notified them that they will impose false penalty points (hereinafter “Notification of the instant audit results”).
Accordingly, with respect to B and C around the end of November 2017, Article 53(4) of the former Construction Technology Promotion Act (amended by Act No. 15179, Aug. 14, 2018; hereinafter the same) and Article 87(5) [Attachment 8] of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.
Pursuant to paragraph 3.6.2, penalty points of this case shall be the joint supply rate B: C=5.