logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.04.15 2013고단1479
도로법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. Around April 7, 2007, the Defendant violated the restriction on vehicle operation by a road management authority by loading and operating freight exceeding the limited storage weight on D Freight vehicles owned by the Defendant, at the front of a place of business located 94.3km in the Young-dong Highway Incheon. On April 7, 2007, at around 19:51, the Defendant, an employee of the Defendant, on the Defendant’s business.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 7832, Dec. 30, 2005; Act No. 8976, Mar. 21, 2008; Act No. 8976, Mar. 21, 2008; Act No. 831) to the part that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 83 (1) 2 with respect to the business of the corporation, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under the corresponding Article." The defendant received a summary order subject to retrial, and the summary order against the defendant was finalized

However, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality on July 30, 2009 with respect to the above legal provision (the Constitutional Court Order 2008HunGa17 Decided July 30, 2009). Accordingly, the above legal provision was retroactively invalidated in accordance with the proviso of Article 47(2) of the Constitutional Court Act.

Thus, the above facts charged 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