beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2015.04.29 2015고단747

도로법위반

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is engaged in transportation business as the owner of a truck A.

On May 7, 2007, at around 11:25, 322 local roads located in the mixtoma drawing, and at around 46.9 tons of the vehicle by driving the said vehicle with respect to the Defendant’s business, B, an employee of the Defendant, and operated the said vehicle with a gross weight exceeding 40 tons, thereby violating the restrictions on the operation of the vehicle by the road management authority.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Articles 86 and 83(1)2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995; Act No. 8976, Mar. 21, 2008; Act No. 8976, Mar. 21, 2008) to the facts charged in this case, and the defendant was notified of a summary order subject to review and confirmed.

On July 30, 2009, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an act of violation under Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the same Article shall also be imposed on the corporation" (the Constitutional Court Order 2008Ga17 Decided July 30, 2009) that "after the above summary order becomes final and conclusive, the provision of the Act retroactively loses its effect pursuant to the proviso of Article 47 (2) of the Constitutional Court Act."

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