도로법위반
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
1. On December 3, 1993, G is an operator of H cargo vehicles, and the Defendant is a corporation established for the purpose of cargo transportation services, etc., G is in violation of the restriction on vehicle operation of the road management authority by loading a consignment of more than 12.8 tons of the limited 10 tons of the 38th line of the national highway on the 38th line in the new rupture, at the rupture of March 10:17 on December 3, 1993, while the Defendant, who is an employee, committed an offense against the Defendant’s business.
2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Article 86, Article 84 subparagraph 1, and Article 54 (1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545 of Mar. 10, 1993, and amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995; hereinafter the same) to the facts charged against the defendant, and applied Article 86, Article 84 subparagraph 1, and Article 54 (1) of the same Act, and the summary order subject to review was issued
However, the Constitutional Court en banc Decision 201Hun-Ga24 Decided December 29, 201, rendered a decision that “if an agent, employee, or other employee of a corporation commits an offense under Article 84(1) of the former Road Act with respect to the business of the corporation, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under Article 84(2) of the Act shall also be imposed on the corporation” in Article 86 of the former Road Act, which applies to the case of the defendant, and thereby the said provision of the Act retroactively loses its effect pursuant to the proviso of Article 4
On the other hand, where the penal law or the legal provision becomes retroactively effective due to the decision of unconstitutionality, the defendant's case which was prosecuted by applying the pertinent provision shall be deemed to constitute a crime.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Do9037 delivered on April 15, 2005, etc.). Thus, since the facts charged against the defendant constitute a crime, the defendant is acquitted pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment against the defendant is publicly notified pursuant to Article 440 of the Criminal Procedure Act.