도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The summary of the facts charged C is a person who is employed as a driver of a D vehicle body belonging to the defendant corporation, and the defendant is a corporation established for the purpose of cargo transport business, etc., and C, around October 4, 1993, on the road located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongbuk-gun, with a 11.46 tones 46 tones 10.12 tons of the above vehicle and operates the above road on which the operation of a vehicle exceeding 10 tones over 10 tones during the stable is restricted, and the defendant operates the above process as above in relation to the defendant's duties at a time and at the above place.
2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Article 86, Article 84 subparagraph 1 and Article 54 (1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545 of Mar. 10, 1993, and amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995; hereinafter the same) to the above charged facts, and the summary order of KRW 200,000 was notified and finalized in this court.
However, on December 29, 201, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality as to the part of Article 86 of the above Act that “if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 84 subparagraph 1 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall also be punished by a fine under the corresponding Article” (see Constitutional Court en banc Decision 201Hun-Ga24, Dec. 29, 201). Accordingly, the above provision of the law was retroactively invalidated in accordance with the main sentence of Article 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act.
Thus, the facts charged of this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act