도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. On January 12, 1994, the driver of B-owned vehicle, who was employed by the Defendant, operated the said vehicle in a state where it is loaded with miscellaneous in excess of 10 tons of a knife at the inspection station for the control of the knife vehicle located in the knife-gun located in the knife-gun, the National Highway No. 5 of the Gyeongbuk-gun, and refused the request of the road management agency in violation of the restriction on the operation of the knife
Therefore, even though the defendant should thoroughly educate and supervise the employed driver so that he does not operate the vehicle properly, he neglected to do so and caused the above driver to commit the above violation.
2. The judgment prosecutor applied Article 86 and Article 84 subparagraph 2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545 of Mar. 10, 193, and amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995), and applied Article 86 and Article 84 subparagraph 2 of the former Road Act, and the punishment of a fine of KRW 30,000 is finalized by a summary order subject to review. However, if an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 84 subparagraph 2 of the Act, the corporation shall also be punished by a fine under the corresponding Article.
“The portion of the Constitutional Court Decision 2012 Constitutional Court Decision 2012Hun-Ga, October 25, 2012, retroactively lost its effect.
Therefore, the facts charged of this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.