B On December 15, 1998, around 20:04, around 20:04, at the front of the inspection station of the restriction on the operation of the Jindo-gun located in Jindo-gun, Jindo-gun, Jindo-gun, the national highway 18, in excess of 10 tons of the restricted livestock, and 11.15 tons of the restricted livestock during the third livestock, thereby violating the restriction on the operation of the road management agency. The defendant committed the above violation as to his duties at the above date, time, place, and place.

B. B on December 30, 1998, around 20:15, around 20:18, at the front of the inspection station of the restriction on the operation of the Jindo-gun located in Jindo-gun, Jindo-gun, the National Road No. 18, Jin-gun, Jindo-gun, in excess of 10 tons among the restricted axiss, and operated the truck while loaded with the cargo of 11.66 tons during the third axis, thereby violating the restriction on the operation of the road management authority. The Defendant committed the above violation as to his duties at the said date, time, place, and place.

2. Where the Acts and subordinate statutes on punishment have retroactively lost its validity due to the decision of unconstitutionality by the Constitutional Court, a prosecuted case against which a public prosecution was instituted by applying the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes shall be pronounced not guilty under Article 325

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2010Do5986 Decided December 16, 2010 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2010Do5986, Oct. 28, 2010). Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995; Act No. 7832, Dec. 30, 2005) provides that “When an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under the relevant provision,” which is unconstitutional (see, e.g., Constitutional Court Decision 2010Hun-Ga14, 15, 21, 27, 35, 38, 470, Oct. 28, 2010).