도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The Defendant is the user of A, and A around 09:30 on Jan. 12, 2007, in order to preserve the structure of the road and prevent the danger of operation, around 09:30 tons, A operated a vehicle in violation of a road management authority by loading more than 10.40 tons, 2 12.90 tons, 3 10.90 tons, 4 10.70 tons, 4.90 tons, 4.90 tons of total weight, 0.40 tons, 0.40 tons, 200 tons, 10.90 tons, 10.90 tons, 4.90 tons, and 4.90 tons of total weight, in excess of 0.40 tons, 2.90 tons, 90 tons, 0.90 tons, 0.70 tons, and 4.90 tons of vehicle operation.
2. The prosecutor of the judgment is amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005 as to the facts charged of this case, and it is also amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30,
3. The same shall apply to those prior to the amendment by Act No. 8976 of 21.
(1) Article 86 and Article 83(1)2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 954, Jul. 30, 2009); Article 86 of the same Act provides that “When an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an act in violation of the provisions of Article 83(1)2 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall be punished by a fine provided for in the corresponding provision shall also be punished by a fine (Article 83(1)2 of the same Act).” Thus, the above provision of the Road Act retroactively loses its effect.
Thus, 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