logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 정읍지원 2013.05.23 2013고단168
도로법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The Defendant is the owner of A truck, and the employee B violated the restriction on operation by loading the cargo of 11.2 tons and 11.4 tons at the third axis and operating the said vehicle on July 18, 1995, at around 16:20, the 385.2kimn at the upstream of the Southern Sea Highway, in excess of 10 tons of a stable weight.

2. The judgment prosecutor instituted a public action by applying Article 86 and Article 83(1)2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of January 5, 1995, and by Act No. 7832 of December 30, 2005), and the sentence of a fine not exceeding 500,000 won was finalized by a summary order No. 95 high-ranking2114 of November 10, 1995, but Article 86 of the above Act provides that "where an agent, employee or other employee of a corporation commits an offense under Article 83(1)2 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under Article 83(1) shall also be imposed on the corporation, which shall be imposed on the corporation, is retroactively invalidated by the Constitutional Court ruling No. 2010, Oct. 28, 2010.

Therefore, the facts charged in this case constitute a crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow