beta
(영문) 창원지방법원 거창지원 2012.12.26 2012고단486

도로법위반

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that “the Defendant violated the restriction on the operation of the vehicle by allowing his employees to operate the B-owned vehicle in excess of the limit of the 2-scale limit on the road near the G-Jin Highway, around March 21, 2002, around 12:46.”

The prosecutor prosecuted the above charged facts by applying the joint penal provisions under Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995, and amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005). As to this, the summary order of a fine of KRW 700,000 was notified and confirmed through the summary order subject to review.

However, after the above summary order became final and conclusive, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that Article 86 of the above Act is in violation of the Constitution against the principle of responsibility (Supreme Court Order 2010HunGa38 Decided October 28, 2010) and thus, the above legal provision, which is a applicable provision of the facts charged, retroactively loses its effect.

Therefore, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.