도로법위반
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
1. On August 23, 2007, the Defendant, as an employee, violated the restrictions on the operation of the management agency by loading more than 11.11t on the third axis of the above vehicle and operating B cargo at the Seoansan Industrial Complex located at the 64-5m area located in Ansan-si, Seoan-si, Incheon, Seoan-dong, Seoan-dong, Incheon, 12.5m area of the 64-5m area.
2. As to the facts charged in the instant case, the prosecutor charged a public prosecution by applying Articles 86 and 83(1)2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 7832, Dec. 30, 2005; Act No. 8976, Mar. 21, 2008; hereinafter the same) to the facts charged in the instant case, and the summary order subject to retrial was notified and finalized.
However, after a summary order subject to review becomes final and conclusive, the part of Article 86 of the former Road Act that "where an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the relevant Article shall also be imposed on the corporation," which is in violation of the Constitution (Supreme Court Order 2008HunGa17 Decided July 30, 2009). Accordingly, the above provision of the Act, which is a applicable provision of the facts charged, retroactively loses its effect pursuant to the proviso of Article 47 (2) of the former Constitutional Court Act (amended by Act No. 12597, May 20, 2014).
3. In conclusion, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, a judgment of innocence is rendered in accordance with the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and a summary of the judgment of the defendant is announced in accordance with Article 440 of the Criminal Procedure Act.