도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. On June 16, 2003, around 16:27 June 16, 2003, the Defendant, an employee of the Defendant, was omitted in the facts charged, and the number of vehicles below C at the Daejeon metropolitan office, which was located in the direction of the passage of the expressway between Daejeon and B. A dump trucks violated the restriction on vehicle operation of the road management authority by operating the 11. metric truck with freight exceeding 10 tons of the limited axis.
2. The prosecutor of the judgment was amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995 as to the facts charged of this case, and was amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005.
(a) The same shall apply;
Article 86 and Article 83(1)2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 12597, May 2014) provides that “When an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense provided for in Article 83(1)2 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine provided for in the relevant Article shall also be imposed on the corporation” in Article 86 of the same Act shall be imposed on the corporation, which shall be subject to a violation of the Constitution (see Constitutional Court en banc Decision 2010Hun-Ga14, 15, 21, 27, 35, 38, 444, 70, which is declared as of October 28, 2010). Accordingly, according to the above decision, the part of the above Article 47(2) of the Constitutional Court Act (amended by Act No. 12597, May 20, 2014) which is applicable to the facts charged of the instant case is retroactively invalidated pursuant to the proviso to Article 47(2).
3. In conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.