logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 논산지원 2016.01.08 2015고단755
도로법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is A 16t car owners.

On May 9, 1996, the defendant's employee violated the restriction on the operation of the vehicle of the road management agency by operating the above truck with the loading weight of more than 10t on 0.5t, 3 1.2t on the said truck on the 3 axis, at the Gisan Highway located in the head office of the Yannam Branch of the Yannam Branch of the Korea Road located in gold-gu 649, Geum-gu, Geum-gu, Gi-gu, Kim Jong-gu, 1996, on the part of the defendant's employee.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Articles 86, 83(1)2, and 54(1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995 and amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005; hereinafter “Act”) to the facts charged of the instant case and prosecuted the prosecution by applying Articles 86, 83(1)2, and 54(1).

However, when an agent, employee or other servant of a corporation commits an offence under Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under the corresponding provision in Article 86 of the Act.

The Constitutional Court Decision 2010Hun-Ga decided October 28, 2010, ruled 2010, retroactively lost its effect.

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

arrow