logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.02.13 2014고단552
도로법위반
Text

The defendant is innocent.

Reasons

1. The facts charged by the Defendant, around April 27, 1995, at a point of 20.4km along the Gyeong Highway, which is located in the 20.4km line of the Gyeong Highway, violated the restriction on vehicle operation of the road management agency by: (a) A, an employee of the Defendant, at the front of the Seoul Highway Business Office; (b) 10 tons of the 10 tons of the 11.6 tons of the 10 tons of the 2 axis of vehicles owned by the Defendant, with respect to the Defendant’s duties, by

2. The Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality on October 28, 2010 that "where an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under Article 83 (1) 2 shall also be imposed on the corporation in violation of the Constitution." Accordingly, 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) applied by the public prosecutor to the facts charged in the case of this case is retroactively invalidated pursuant to the proviso to Article 47 (2) of the Constitutional Court Act.

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

arrow