도로법위반
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the above judgment shall be publicly notified.
1. On June 2, 1994, the Defendant is the owner of B truck, and around 15:40 on June 2, 1994, the Defendant, who is his employee, led a public official controlling the vehicle to go to the above vehicle at a place where the operation of more than 10 tons of the vehicle is restricted in front of the inspection station of the Daejeon E-dong, Daejeon E-dong, but failed to comply with it and escaped without any special reason.
2. The judgment prosecutor applied Article 86 and Article 84 subparagraph 1 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545, Mar. 10, 1993; Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995); and the punishment of a fine of KRW 500,00 is finalized by a summary order subject to review; however, if an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83 (1) subparagraph 2 of the said Act in Article 86 of the said Act, the said corporation shall also be punished by a fine under the relevant Article.
“The Constitutional Court Decision 2011Hun-Ga24 dated December 29, 2011 rendered that this part was retroactively null and void with respect to the part “.”
Therefore, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.