logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.05.28 2013고단2098
도로법위반
Text

The defendant is innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged in this case is that B is a juristic person established for the purpose of transportation and delivery business, etc., and B is the owner of the above vehicle. On May 4, 1995, in order for the Korea Highway Corporation 3.7km Branching 3.7km Branching from the mid-to half Highway on May 4, 1995, in excess of 10 tons of the limited axis, it violates the restriction on vehicle operation of the road management agency by loading and operating freight exceeding 11.1 tons of the above 4 axis, and the defendant committed the above violation in relation to the defendant's duties at the same time and place.

2. The Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality on October 28, 2010 that "if an agent, employee, or other worker 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) 2 shall also be imposed on the corporation in violation of the Constitution." Accordingly, 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) applied by the public prosecutor to the facts charged in the case of this case is retroactively invalidated pursuant to the proviso of Article 47 (2) of the Constitutional Court Act.

Thus, the facts charged in this case constitute a crime, and thus, is not guilty under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

arrow