도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. On January 4, 1994, at around 14:15, the main point of the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant, an employee of the Defendant, operated the Defendant’s vehicle B with freight exceeding 11.1 tons in front of the Daegu District Office, the Korea Highway Corporation, 359.5km in Seoul, at the seat of 359.5km, and violated the restriction on the operation of the vehicle by the road management authority.
2. As to Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545, Mar. 10, 1993; Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995) which is a joint penal provision among the applicable provisions to the facts charged in this case, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision of December 29, 2011 that "where an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits a violation referred to in subparagraph 1 of Article 84 with respect to the business of the corporation, the corporation shall be punished by a fine referred to in the relevant Article," in Article 84 (1) of the same Act, which is a joint penal provision to the facts charged in this case, was ruled to be in violation of the Constitution. According to the above decision of unconstitutionality, the part of the above legal provision, which is the applicable provisions to the facts charged in this case, was retroactively invalidated pursuant to the proviso of
3. In conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.