logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2020.04.23 2019고단5189
도로법위반
Text

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

Reasons

1. On September 8, 1998, around 09:30 on September 8, 1998, the Defendant, a driver belonging to the Defendant, loaded and operated a scrap metal without covering the cover with C freight vehicles at the seat of the Daegu branch of the Daegu branch of the Highway, and his employee violated the restrictions on the operation of vehicles by the road management authority.

2. The prosecutor filed a public prosecution against the defendant by applying Article 86 and Article 83 subparagraph 2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995, and amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005) to the facts charged in this case.

However, the part of Article 86 of the former Road Act 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, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under the relevant Article." Thus, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that the relevant provision of the same Act is in violation of the Constitution (see, e.g., Constitutional Court Decision 2010Hun-Ga14, 15, 21, 27, 35, 38, 44, 70 (combined) decided Oct. 28, 2010); and the provision of the same Act retroactively loses its effect pursuant to the proviso to Article 47 (2) of the former Constitutional Court Act (Amended by Act No. 12597, May 20, 2014).

Thus, the facts charged of this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment against the defendant is publicly announced pursuant to the main sentence

arrow