logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2013.04.11 2013재고정3
도로법위반
Text

The Defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment of innocence of this case is publicly notified.

Reasons

1. The Defendant in the facts charged in the instant case is the owner of B, C (Tex), and A is the driver of the said vehicle, and A, an employee of the Defendant, is the driver of the said vehicle, and A, at around 14:10 on October 17, 2003, is operating on the roads of 1021, the Haan-gun, Haan-gun, Busan, the Haan-gun, a regional highway 1021 on the roads of Haan-gun, Haan-gun, U.S., the road was in violation of the restriction on the operation of a vehicle with a total weight exceeding 32.4 tons, while restricting the operation of a vehicle exceeding 10 tons, the said road violated the restriction on the operation of the vehicle by a road management authority by loading and operating a concrete bed with a total weight exceeding 42

2. We examine the judgment, and the prosecutor prior to the amendment by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995 as to the above charged facts against the defendant, and the amendment by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005.

(a) The same shall apply;

Article 86, Article 83(1)2, and Article 54(1) apply to a public prosecution. However, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision on October 28, 2010 that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83(1)2 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the relevant Article shall also be imposed on the corporation," and Article 86 of the former Road Act states that "if the agent, employee, or other worker of the corporation commits a violation under Article 83(1)2 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the relevant Article shall be imposed on the corporation," under the proviso to Article 47(2) of the Constitutional Court Act, since the above provision of the law becomes retroactively null

3. According to the conclusion, a defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and a summary of the judgment against the defendant is publicly notified under Article 440 of the Criminal Procedure

arrow