도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
The summary of the facts charged in this case is that the Defendant, an employee of the Defendant, violated the restriction on the vehicle operation of the road management authority by operating CF at the main office of business at the location of 173 km away from the 173 km away from the main office of business around December 18, 2007, in relation to the Defendant’s business, at around 11:29 on December 18, 2007.
On the other hand, the prosecutor prosecuted the facts charged of this case by applying Articles 86, 83(1)2, and 54(1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005 and wholly amended by Act No. 8976 of Mar. 21, 2008), and the summary order of KRW 300,000 was notified and finalized in this court.
However, after the above summary order became final and conclusive, Article 86 of the above Act provides that "where an agent, employee, or other servant of a corporation commits an offence provided for in Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine provided for in the corresponding Article shall be imposed on the corporation, the corporation shall also be imposed on the violation of the Constitution (Supreme Court Order 2008HunGa17 Decided July 30, 2009). The above provision of the above Act, which is the applicable provisions of the facts charged, has retroactively lost 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.