logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 거창지원 2013.05.08 2013고단125
도로법위반
Text

The defendant is innocent.

Reasons

The summary of the facts charged in this case is that "the defendant violated the restriction on the operation of the vehicle of the road management authority by allowing his employees to operate the freight vehicle exceeding the loading limit on the 37th line on the national highway in Mag-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, the national highway located in 37, 2007," around February 2, 2007.

With respect to the facts charged in this case, the prosecutor instituted a public prosecution by applying the provision of Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005 and wholly amended by Act No. 8976 of Mar. 21, 2008) that "if an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83 (1) 2 with respect to the business of the corporation, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under the corresponding provision," and the judgment against the defendant was finalized upon receiving a summary order.

However, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality on July 30, 2009 with respect to the above legal provision (the Constitutional Court Order 2008HunGa17 Decided July 30, 2009). Accordingly, the above legal provision was retroactively invalidated in accordance with the proviso of Article 47(2) of the Constitutional Court Act.

Thus, the facts charged in 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