도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. On February 17, 1994, on the part of the defendant's employee A did not comply with the measurement of the load load of the B truck in the area of the mountain area, the mountain area, the mountain area, and the area of the shot area in the shot area in the shot-gun, the Gyeongnam-gun, the Chungcheongnam-gun, the
2. Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545, Mar. 10, 1993 and amended by Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995) which is the applicable provisions of the facts charged in this case, "where an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under subparagraph 2 of Article 84 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the relevant Article shall also be imposed on the corporation." The effect of the provision that "if the agent, employee or other worker of the corporation commits a violation under subparagraph 2 of Article 84, a fine under the relevant Article shall also be imposed on the corporation shall also be imposed on the corporation."
In addition, where the penal law or the legal provision becomes retroactively null and void due to the decision of unconstitutionality, the defendant's case which was prosecuted by applying the relevant provision shall be deemed to be a crime.
Thus, since the facts charged in this case constitute a crime, the defendant is acquitted pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.