logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 천안지원 2016.04.22 2015고단1675
도로법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On September 21, 1993, the summary of the facts charged, B, as the driver of the freight vehicle C15 tons, violated the restriction on the operation of the vehicle, such as loading and operating freight of 11.6 tons each at the 2 axis and the 3 axis, in excess of 10 tons of the 10 tons of the 1st of the 15 tons of the 10th of the 10th of the 10th of the 15th of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 193rd of the

2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Articles 86, 84 subparagraph 1, and 54 (1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545 of Mar. 10, 1993, and amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995; hereinafter the same) to the above facts charged, and brought a public action against the above facts charged. On December 29, 2011, the Constitutional Court imposed a fine under Article 86 of the former Road Act if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under subparagraph 1 of Article 84 in relation to the corporation's business.

“The part of the instant legal provision, which is an applicable legal provision of the instant facts charged, has become retroactively null and void, as the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that the said provision is unconstitutional ( Constitutional Court Order 2011Hun-Ga24).

3. In conclusion, 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