Defendant

A fails to pay the above fine, 50,000.

1. Defendant A, at around 06:00 on July 26, 2007, has been loaded with concrete files, which are building materials, on B in the 158, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, 158, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, 158, in order to operate more than 10t of total weight and 40t of total weight, but, despite the fact that Defendant A is unable to operate more than 11.27t of 4 axis and the total weight of 4.28t;

2. Although Defendant A, as the owner of the foregoing vehicle, should take measures such as occasional education, so as not to violate the restriction on operation, Defendant A, as the owner of the foregoing vehicle, allowed Defendant A to operate the foregoing vehicle excessively.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to notification of detection of vehicles violating restriction on operation on motorways;

1. Article 83 (1) 2 and Article 54 (1) of the Road Act; Article 83 (1) 2 of the Road Act; Article 83 (1) 2 of the Road Act; Articles 54 (1) and 86 of the Road Act; Selection of fines;

1. Defendant A at a workhouse: Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. It is so decided as per Disposition for not less than Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.