logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.06.30 2016고단2118
도로법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On May 30, 1995, the summary of the facts charged is the owner of B truck and his employee violated the provision on restriction on vehicle operation with respect to the Defendant’s business.

2. The crime of this case is an offense falling under Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545 of Mar. 10, 1993, and amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995). The Constitutional Court of Korea has imposed a fine under the corresponding provision of Article 84 (1) where an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 84 (1) with respect to the business of the corporation.

Article 47(2) of the former Constitutional Court Act (amended by Act No. 12597, May 20, 2014) decided that the part violates the Constitution (see Constitutional Court Decision 2011Hun-Ga24, Dec. 29, 201) and thus, the penal provision of this case, the content of which constitutes a violation of the Constitution, was retroactively invalidated pursuant to Article 47(2) of the former Constitutional Court Act.

Therefore, the facts charged of this case 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