logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 부천지원 2020.05.29 2020고단107
건축법위반
Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment for 6 months, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of 10,000,000 won.

However, Defendant A.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A Co., Ltd. is a corporation established for the purpose of the housing construction and sales business, etc. as the owner of the multi-family house in Kimpo-si, and Defendant A is the representative director.

1. A person who intends to construct or substantially repair a building shall obtain permission from the competent authority;

Nevertheless, around September 2018, the Defendant divided 2 households in the second floor of the building into 5 households, 2 households in the third floor of the building into 6 households, and 616.16 square meters in total into 5 households, by expanding the boundary walls with cement and bricks, etc. from the 4th floor of reinforced concrete structure in Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si without obtaining permission from the Kimpo-si market.

2. Defendant B, a representative of the Defendant, committed the same act as that of the above Section A in relation to the Defendant’s business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant A’s legal statement

1. Written statements of D;

1. A written accusation of the Kimpo market;

1. A survey table on actual conditions of violating buildings;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Land cadastre and general building register;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to certificate all matters registered;

1. Article 108 (1) 1 and Article 11 (1) of the Building Act (unauthorized repair) and Article 112 (3), Article 108 (1) 1, and Article 108 (1) 1, and Article 111 (1) 1, and Article 11 (1) (Joint Penal Provisions), and Article 11 (1) (Joint Penalty Provisions) of the Building Act;

1. Defendant A who is subject to suspended execution: Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant B Co., Ltd.: The sentencing criteria for offenses of violating the Building Act with reasons for sentencing Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act are not set.

The crime of this case is deemed to have increased the number of households by making large-scale repair of the apartment house owned by the defendant company without a building permit in order to increase the rental proceeds, and in light of the background, method, and consequence of the crime, and the above illegal remodeling may cause danger to the safety of the building.

arrow