logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2013.06.26 2013고단1091
도로법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On July 24, 1993, around 00:29 around July 24, 1993, the Defendant, as his employee, violated the restriction on vehicle operation of the road management authority by operating the 2nd weight of 11.1 ton of the 2nd 10 tons in excess of 10 tons of the 2nd 10 tons of the 2nd 10-1st breadth of the 2nd 3nd 2nd 19

2. The prosecutor charged the facts charged in this case by applying Articles 86, 84 subparagraph 1, and 54 (1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545, Mar. 10, 1993; Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995). The Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "where an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under subparagraph 1 of Article 84 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the relevant Article shall also be imposed on the corporation," in Article 86 of the same Act, that "if the agent, employee, or other worker of the corporation commits a violation under subparagraph 1 of Article 84, a fine under the relevant Article shall be imposed on the corporation," which is in violation of the Constitution (the Constitutional Court Order 2011Hun-Ga24, Dec. 29, 2011).

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

arrow