beta
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.05.23 2017고단1463

도로법위반

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is the owner of A vehicle, and B is the employee of the defendant.

B On February 14, 2003, around 21:09, at the tent branch office located in 184-51 located in Yanandong-dong, 184-51, B violated the restrictions on the operation of the Road Management Agency by operating the said vehicle as loaded with cargo of 11.3 tons at the 4 axis of the said vehicle in excess of 10 tons per each axis under the restriction criteria.

As a result, B, a defendant's employee, committed the above violation in relation to the defendant's business.

2. The former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995, and amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005) which applies the above facts charged, where an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the corresponding Article shall also be imposed on the corporation.

“The portion” was retroactively invalidated by the Constitutional Court’s decision on the constitutionality of a statute of limitations (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Hun-Ga14, 15, 21, 27, 35, 38, 44, 70 (Consolidation) of October 28, 2010).

Thus, the facts charged of this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.