耽誤你一點時間,立即前往觀看→https://goo.gl/FQupkp

 1.png  

2.jpg

 

2016-11-2603:00

HOUSE OF CARDS: Former residents of the complex that collapsed on Feb. 6 said five years in prison is too light a sentence for its developer and buildersBy Wang Chieh and Jake Chung / Staff reporter, with 小額信貸利率計算staff writerVictims of the collapse of the Weiguan Jinlong Complex yesterday cried foul and called for more severe punishments after the Tainan District Court sentenced its developer and builders to five years in prison.A magnitude 6.6 earthquake struck on Feb. 6, toppling the structure in Kaohsiung’s Meinong Township (美濃) in the early hours of the morning, killing 115 people, injuring 96 and leaving 289 homeless.The court yesterday sentenced Weiguan Jinlong developer Lin小額貸款率利最低銀行 2017 Ming-hui (林明輝), architects Chang Kuei-pao (張魁寶) and Cheng Chin-kuei (鄭進貴), Weiguan design department’s Hung Hsien-han (洪仙汗) and structural engineer Cheng Tung-hsu (鄭東旭) to five years in prison and fines of NT$900,000 each.The verdict in the first trial can be appealed.Former Weiguan re哪家銀行小額借款利率最低sidents Yang Wei-ning (楊惟甯) and her husband, Hung Chia-yi (洪家益), said they were unhappy with the ruling.The couple were among the last to be rescued from the rubble. Hung lost both his legs in the incident.Yang said she tried not to think too much about the earthquake, but she followed the trial.The sentences were too light, she said, adding: “Even if Lin and the architects had paid with their lives, it would not be enough.”Yang said the defendants only have to spend five years in prison, while those affected by the building’s collapse have to live with its effect for the rest of their lives.Prosecutors said that while Lin admitted he had not done his best to supervise the construction, he refused to plead guilty, as did the other defendants.Prosecutors charged the five with taking shortcuts and altering the project’s design and construction process to cut expenses and skimming funds meant for building materials, which affected the complex’s structural integrity.They sought to charge the defendants with breaching architectural regulations in the Criminal Code, which would have added three years to each sentence, but the construction license was issued in November 1992 and the statute of limitations had expired.The defendants were given the maximum sentence for criminal negligence, they said.新聞來源:TAIPEI TIMES

苗栗小額借款快速撥款新竹小額借貸銀行小額借貸利率
9F64BE0C95D6FB11
文章標籤
創作者介紹

samanty4pj1jp@outlook.com

samanty4pj1jp 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()