beta
Text
Defendants are not guilty.
Reasons
1. On August 2012, Defendant B introduced the construction in question to the victim D, “The construction of a new neighborhood living facility in In Incheon-gu E is being carried out together with A by being awarded a contract with the victim for KRW 4,100,000 per square meter at a place where the location of Incheon is unknown, and it does not constitute a condition for construction to do so.”
Defendant
A around August 2012, at the G office operated by the victim in the Namdong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City F, “B is an executor, and is a person who executes the construction. There is no domestic construction license, and H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”) borrowed a license from H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”) to obtain a contract for construction from the owner.”
Defendant
B stated that “The consent of the owner for transferring the status of the contractor shall be obtained, but the contract between the owner and the owner shall be prepared on October 18 in the situation of the owner in question. To transfer the status of the contractor, the contractor stated that “The contractor will transfer the status of contractor to the owner 70 million won in return for taking over the status of the contractor.”
However, H’s I was awarded a contract to work from the owner J, but the work did not start due to the lack of funds from J and I. Defendant A lent KRW 50 million to J on the condition that I would have been repaid one month after the introduction of I, instead, stated that “A is recognized as a contractor” at the bottom of the contractor’s column for the contract signed by J and I, and Defendant A borrowed a construction license from H.
There was no authority to transfer the status of contractor related to the above construction due to the absence of a contract for construction work under the name of J. Accordingly, it was not possible to obtain the consent of the J to transfer the status of contractor, and in fact the J grants the status of contractor KRW 70 million, and there was no fact that the J received the consent of the transfer of the status of contractor.