도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. On January 29, 199, the summary of the facts charged in this case, A, an employee of the Defendant, was in violation of the Defendant’s vehicle operation restriction by the road management authority by operating the Defendant’s freight loaded with freight of 11.08 tons and 11.31 ton in the 3-ship 11.08 tons, and 4-ship 11.31 ton in the 4-ship while driving the Defendant’s freight vehicle B with respect to the Defendant’s business.
2. As to 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), which is a joint penal provision among the applicable provisions to the facts charged in this case, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision on Oct. 28, 2010 that "where an agent, employee or other employee of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the corporation's business, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under Article 83 (1) 2 of the Act shall also be punished by the Constitution, and the part of the above Article 47 (2) of the Constitutional Court Act (amended by Act No. 7832 of Oct. 28, 2010) shall retroactively lose its effect pursuant to the proviso to Article 47 (2) of the Constitutional Court Act.
3. In conclusion, 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.