도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The Defendant is the owner of C vehicle. On April 21, 2007, the Daejeon head of the Regional Construction and Management Administration violated the National Land Management Office by carrying more than 10 tons of gross weight, 40 tons of height, 4.2 meters of length, 16.7 meters of width, 2.5 meters of width, in order to preserve the structure of the road and prevent the danger of operation, at the inspection room of vehicles violating the restriction on operation in Yeong-gun-gun, the operation of which is located in Yeong-gun, the Defendant’s employees around 03:42 on April 21, 2007 with respect to his duties, even though D, who is the owner of C vehicle, is a road with more than 1.30 tons of gross weight, 11.30 tons of gross weight, 11.35 tons of gross weight, 46.60 tons of gross weight, and 6.60 tons of gross weight, compared to the restriction on operation.
2. The prosecutor charged a public prosecution for the above charged facts by applying Articles 86 and 83(1)2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005 and amended by Act No. 8976 of Mar. 21, 2008) to the above charged facts.
However, Article 86 of the above Act provides that "if an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits an act of violating Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall also be punished by a fine under the corresponding Article." The Constitutional Court Order 2008Hun-Ga17 dated July 30, 2009 ruled that the above provision of the law retroactively lost its effect.
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.