logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 정읍지원 2013.05.23 2013고단155
도로법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On January 3, 1994, at around 19:08, the Defendant, the owner of a truck A, who is his employee B, violated the restriction on operation by carrying a cargo of 11.1 ton on a 4 livestock shed in excess of a stable weight of 10 ton on the road on the front of the main road of the Honam Expressway Highway, and operating the said vehicle.

2. The judgment prosecutor applied Article 86 and Article 84 subparagraph 1 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545, Mar. 10, 1993; Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995); and the sentence of a fine of 300,000 won was finalized by a summary order of April 29, 1994 by the court; however, Article 86 of the above Act provides that "if an agent, employee, or other employee of a corporation commits a violation under subparagraph 1 of Article 84 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under the corresponding Article, as well as the corporation, by the Constitutional Court Order 201Hun-Ga24, Dec. 29, 2011."

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

arrow