도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. On April 13, 2003, around 16:58, the Defendant, his employee, was in violation of the restriction on the operation of vehicles by the road management authority by loading and operating pine trees with a height of 4.21 meters on C vehicles in excess of 4.0 meters at the control room for vehicles subject to restriction on the operation of public taxation located in the Sari-ri Sari-si, Masan-si, Masan-si.
2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Articles 86 and 83(1)2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995; Act No. 7832, Dec. 30, 2005; Act No. 7832, Dec. 30, 2005) to the facts charged. The Constitutional Court ruled in Article 86 that "where an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83(1)2 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the relevant Article shall be imposed on the corporation," that "the relevant provision of a fine under the relevant Article shall be imposed on the corporation," is unconstitutional (the Constitutional Court Order 2010Hun-Ga14,15,21,27, 27, 35, 38, 44, 70 (merger).
Thus, the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.