도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, as the owner of C vehicle, had D, an employee, operate the said vehicle in excess of 1.5 tons at the 26.9 kilometer of the board school between the 05:35 on April 6, 200 and the 26.9 kilometer of the board school.
2. The above facts charged constitute Article 86, Article 83 (1) 2, and Article 54 (1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995, and amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005; hereinafter the same), but upon the decision of the Constitutional Court, Article 86 of the former Road Act provides that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense as prescribed in Article 83 (1) 2 with respect to the business of the corporation, a fine as prescribed in the corresponding Article shall also be imposed on the corporation, in accordance with the decision of unconstitutionality as to Article 86 of the former Road Act, the above part of Article 86 of the former Road Act retroactively loses 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