logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2017.08.23 2017고단1536
도로법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is a corporation established for the purpose of the trucking transport business of general cargo. D, the Defendant’s employee, violated the restriction on the operation of the vehicle of the road management agency by loading cargo of more than 40 tons among the 5 metric tons of the 11.40 tons of the 2 livestock, the 13.70 tons of the 4 livestock, the 11.45 tons of the 4 livestock, and the 52.85 tons of the 5 livestock, and the 52.85 tons of the 5 livestock and loaded the 52.85 tons of the 5 livestock and operated the 5 Trac and thereby violating the restriction on the operation of the vehicle of the road management agency.

2. As to the facts charged of this case, the prosecutor charged a public action by applying Articles 86, 83(1)2 and 54(1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995, and by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005), and the summary order of KRW 2,00,000 was notified and finalized in this court.

If an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under the provisions of Article 83 (1) 2 in relation to the corporation's business on October 28, 2010, the Constitutional Court has issued the above summary order on October 28, 2010.

“The Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality on the part of the Constitutional Court [2010 Hun-Ga, 14, 15, 21, 27, 35, 38, 44, 70 Hun-Ga, 200 Hun-Ga, 14, 200 Hun-Ga, 20 Hun-Ga, 35, 38, 44, 70 Hun-Ga]

Thus, the facts charged of this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, is acquitted pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow