logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2014.05.30 2014노303
주택법위반
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) and the situation at the time of completion of the apartment as stated in the facts charged of this case, although the unconstruction of the apartment of this case can be deemed to constitute a construction of a "illegal housing construction", the court below acquitted the remainder of the facts charged of this case emphasizing only the formal procedures of the Seongbuk-gu Office. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) Defendant B is a director of the supervising business department of the company A, who is dispatched to the construction site and performs supervision over the construction work; (b) was designated as a supervisor of the construction work of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D main apartment complex; (c) supervision over the construction work of the construction work of the construction work; (d) supervision over the construction work of the construction work of the construction work of the building work of Seongbuk-gu; and (e) supervision over the construction work of the construction work of the building work, the supervisor shall not faithfully verify whether the construction work is performed in conformity with the design documents and shall not inflict losses on the occupant. Nevertheless, even if the completion report submitted to the Seoul Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office around November 30, 201, which was the scheduled completion date of the construction work of the above apartment, was not constructed differently from the design documents, the Defendant entered the total progress rate of construction work of the above apartment, stating that the construction work was completed at 100%, and provided it to the Seongbuk-gu Office on the same day, thereby causing losses to the occupants.

B. The lower court’s determination is that there are many civil petitions before the Seongbuk-gu Office grants authorization for completion.

arrow