beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 목포지원 2016.06.23 2016고단312

도로법위반

Text

Defendants shall be acquitted respectively.

Reasons

1. The specification of the facts charged

A. Violation of restrictions on the operation of vehicles in front of a vehicle inspection station in Yangsan-do, Yangyang-do, 2016, Defendant A, an employee of Defendant 312, around November 22, 1993, when around 16:46 around 22, 1993

(b) A violation of restrictions on the operation of vehicles on the high-speed national highways in Jinyang-gun, Jinyang-gun on September 23, 1994, 2016, which is an employee of the Defendant 315 senior group;

(c) A violation of restrictions on the operation of vehicles on the roads on the roads in the middle of the area of the Dognam-gun of Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do on December 28, 1994, by C, an employee of Defendant 318, who is an employee of the Highest 2016 Highest 318.

(d) A violation of restrictions on the operation of vehicles at the 119km of the place of business of the Eup/Myeon located in the previous Eup/Myeon on October 18, 1996 of D, an employee of the 2016 order 321, the Defendant, at the end of 2016 order, around 21:46.

E. Violation of restrictions on the operation of vehicles at the place of business with a location of 155 km on March 17, 1997, of the name and unclaimed boxes, who are the employees of the Defendant 324 high group 2016 high group 327.

(f) A violation of restrictions on the operation of vehicles in front of a difficulty in construction works on August 29, 1996 at around 00:08, August 29, 2016 by E, an employee of Defendant 327, who is an employee of Defendant 327.

2. Since punishment laws applicable to each summary order subject to review have lost effect retroactively according to the Constitutional Court’s decision of unconstitutionality, each of the defendants shall be acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.