도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. Around October 13, 200, the Defendant, an employee of the Defendant, violated the restriction on vehicle operation by carrying freight exceeding the load capacity at the business site of the Korea Highway Corporation around October 13, 200 and operating a vehicle.
2. The prosecutor of the judgment filed a public prosecution on the facts charged of this case by applying Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995, and amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005) that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83 (1) 2 with respect to the business of the corporation, the corporation shall be fined under the corresponding Article." The "applicable Act" of the summary order subject to review includes only "Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act, and Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act", but the above provisions are followed.
The summary order subject to review was notified to the defendant and finally confirmed.
However, after the summary order subject to review became final and conclusive, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that the above part violates the Constitution (the Constitutional Court Decision 2010Hun-Ga1415273538470 decided Oct. 28, 2010) (the Constitutional Court Order 2010Hun-Ga142738470 decided Oct. 28, 201). The above part was retroactively invalidated pursuant
3. In conclusion, 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.