logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2013.04.17 2013고단589
도로법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The facts charged of this case is a corporation established for the purpose of cargo transportation services, etc., and A around August 24, 1993, around 22:30 on August 24, 1993, operated at the Korea Highway Corporation index business office of the Korea Highway Corporation in the South Sea Highway, with a 10 tons of 10 tons of cryp truck, carrying a cryp truck on the cryp truck and operating a cryp truck with a 11.1 ton of 3 cryp truck, thereby violating the authority’s heavy limitation. The defendant company, a driver belonging to the defendant company, violated the above duties

2. In the case of this case, the public prosecutor was prosecuted by applying Article 86 and subparagraph 1 of Article 84 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545, Mar. 10, 1993; Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995); however, the Constitutional Court decided on Dec. 29, 201 that "where an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under subparagraph 1 of Article 84 of the former Road Act with respect to the business of the corporation, the portion of the above Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920, Mar. 10, 1993; Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995) was retroactively invalidated.

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

arrow