logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
서울남부지방법원 2017.05.17 2017고단1456
도로법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

The summary of the charges of summary order against the defendant is as follows: A, an employee of the defendant, violated the restriction on operation of the road management agency in relation to the defendant's business by operating B truck with loaded B truck loaded with B truck 1.2 tons in the four axiss in excess of 10 tons from the road in front of the 83.5 kilometers in the border area located in the 83.5 kilometers of the Gyeong-do Highway around October 23, 1996.

However, Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995, and amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005) which served as the basis of the punishment of this case where an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 84 subparagraph 1 of the Act in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under the corresponding Article.

“Inasmuch as the part of the Constitutional Court’s decision of unconstitutionality has lost its effect (the Constitutional Court 2010Hun-Ga38, Oct. 28, 2010). It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the Defendant’s acquittal pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow