logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2013.10.22 2013고단625
도로법위반
Text

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. The Defendant, a corporation established for the purpose of trucking transport business, etc. on September 27, 2006. On September 27, 2006, the Defendant committed an offense against the Defendant’s business by loading and operating 25 meters of pine trees on C truck in excess of 19 meters in length, which is the Defendant’s employee, on the road in front of the freight driving limitation (type) road on the Gyeongjin National Road 7 line on the road in order to restrict the transmission of trees on the road.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Articles 86, 83(1)2 and 54(1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005 and amended by Act No. 8976 of Mar. 21, 2008; hereinafter the same) to the defendant's summary order as to the facts charged in this case, and the summary order was issued and confirmed as they were.

Article 86 of the former Road Act, which applies mutatis mutandis to the defendant on July 30, 2009 by the Constitutional Court en banc Decision 2008HunGa17 Decided July 30, 2009, "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense provided for in Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall also be punished by a fine under the relevant Article." Accordingly, the provisions of the above Act retroactively lose its effect pursuant to the proviso of Article 47 (2) of the Constitutional Court Act.

On the other hand, where the penal law or the legal provision becomes retroactively effective due to the decision of unconstitutionality, the defendant's case which was prosecuted by applying the pertinent provision shall be deemed to constitute a crime.

(2) Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that “The charges of this case against the defendant shall not be charged as a crime” (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do9037, Apr. 15, 2005). Thus, since the facts charged against the defendant constitute a crime, the defendant shall be acquitted pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure

arrow