logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 거창지원 2012.12.26 2012고단490
도로법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that “the Defendant violated the restriction on the operation of the vehicle by allowing his employees to operate B/L in excess of the limit of the 2-scale weight on the road near the elderly business office on November 3, 2004, around 00:10 on November 3, 2004.”

The prosecutor prosecuted the above charged facts by applying the joint penal provisions under 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). As to this, the summary order of KRW 300,000 through the summary order subject to review was notified and finalized.

However, after the above summary order became final and conclusive, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that Article 86 of the above Act is in violation of the Constitution against the principle of responsibility (Supreme Court Order 2010HunGa38 Decided October 28, 2010) and thus, the above legal provision, which is a applicable provision of the facts charged, retroactively loses its effect.

Therefore, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow