logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 동부지원 2016.11.29 2016고단2125
도로법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. Around July 1, 2002, around 14:07, the Defendant violated the restriction on the operation of vehicles by the road management authority by loading and operating the freight exceeding the limited storage weight of the freight vehicles owned by the Defendant in relation to the Defendant’s business at the 18 km Seosan Business Office located in the direction of the 18 km branch of the Namnam Line.

2. The public prosecutor instituted a public prosecution on the facts charged of this case by applying the provision of Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995, and amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005) that "if an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83 (1) 2 with respect to the business of the corporation, the corporation shall be fined under the corresponding provision."

However, on October 28, 2010, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality as to the above provision of the law (the Constitutional Court Decision 2010Hun-Ga14, 15, 21, 27, 35, 38, 44, 70 (merger) on October 28, 2010). Accordingly, the above provision of the law was retroactively invalidated in accordance with the proviso of Article 47(2) of the Constitutional Court Act.

Thus, the facts charged in 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