도로법위반
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
1. On January 13, 1994, at around 16:05, the Defendant’s employee A, with respect to the Defendant’s business, violated the Defendant’s vehicle operation restriction by carrying freight of 16t of more than 10t of the 2 axis limit weight at the 393 Do road in the Gyeonggi-gun, Gyeonggi-do, Dong-gun, Do-ri, Do-ri, and the Defendant’s B truck.
2. Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545, Mar. 10, 1993; Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995) which is the applicable provisions of the facts charged in the instant case was declared as unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court Decision 201Hun-Ga24, Dec. 29, 201; accordingly, the above provision of the Act retroactively lost its effect.
3. As the facts charged in the instant case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, a judgment of innocence is rendered pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and a summary of the judgment of the Defendant is publicly announced pursuant to Article 58