logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.01.21 2015고단4441
도로법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The Defendant is the owner of B truck. On September 14, 1994, at around 10:10 on September 14, 1994, the Defendant violated the restriction on operation by operating the said vehicle with the volume of 13.25 tons on the 2 axis, and 13.25 tons on the 3 axis, in excess of 10 tons in front of the original village inspection station located in the Daejeon Pungdong-gu, Daejeon, for his employees.

2. The judgment prosecutor applied Article 86 and Article 84 subparagraph 1 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545 of Mar. 10, 1993, by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995), and applied Article 86 and Article 84 subparagraph 1 of the former Road Act, and the punishment of a fine of KRW 200,000 was 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 1 of the said Act, the corporation shall also be punished by a fine under the said Article.

“The portion of the Constitutional Court Decision 2011 Constitutional Court Order 2011Hun-Ga, dated December 29, 201, 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.

arrow