logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 정읍지원 2013.05.23 2013고단96
도로법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On November 16, 1994, around 08:17, the Defendant, as the owner of A truck, violated the restriction on operation by loading freight of more than 11.5 tons at the 3 livestock shed located at the 3 livestock shed located in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, Chungcheongnam-do, the Seoul Metropolitan City, the Seoul Metropolitan City, the Seoul Metropolitan City, and the 10.5 tons of freight and operating the said vehicle.

2. The judgment prosecutor applied Article 86 and Article 84 subparagraph 1 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545, Mar. 10, 1993; Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995); and the sentence of a fine of 300,000 won was finalized by a summary order No. 95 high-ranking22, Mar. 23, 1995; however, Article 86 of the same Act provides that "if an agent, employee, or other employee of a corporation commits a violation under subparagraph 1 of Article 84 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the corresponding Article shall be imposed on the corporation, as well, shall be imposed on the corporation." This part of the Constitutional Court Order No. 2011Hun-Ga24, Dec. 29, 2011, which affected the retroactive effect.

Therefore, the facts charged in this case constitute a crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow