도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The Defendant is the owner of A truck, and around March 28, 1994, around 21:06, the Defendant, who is an employee of the Defendant, violated the restriction on the operation of the vehicle by the road management authority, by operating the truck in a state loaded with freight of at least 11.2 tons, exceeding 10 tons of restricted storage weight, on the street in front of the new coaler's business office of the Korea Highway Corporation, along with the load of at least 10 tons.2 tons.
2. The prosecutor charged the above charged facts by applying Article 86 and Article 84 subparagraph 1 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545 of Mar. 10, 1993, and by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995), and this court issued a summary order of KRW 500,00 to the defendant as of June 16, 1994. The above summary order was finalized after the notice was given to the defendant, but the defendant filed a request for review of the above summary order on the ground that the above provision was unconstitutional.
On the other hand, Article 86 of the above Act provides that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 84 (1) in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the corresponding Article shall also be imposed on the corporation," the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that the 201Hun-Ga24 dated December 29, 201 should be in violation of the Constitution. In accordance with the above decision of unconstitutionality, the above provision of the law has retroactively lost its effect.
3. In conclusion, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, it is so decided as per Disposition by the judgment of not guilty against the defendant under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.