도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. On July 16, 1997, around 10:20 on the part of the Defendant, the Defendant, who is his employee, violated the restriction on vehicle operation of the road management authority by operating the vehicle with a weight of 10.4 tons exceeding 10.4 tons of weight of 2, 3.4 tons, 14 tons of weight of 4.3 tons, and 14.3 tons of weight of 4.3 tons.
2. The prosecutor charged the facts charged in this case by applying Articles 86, 83(1)2, and 54(1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995; Act No. 7832, Dec. 30, 2005; Act No. 7832, Dec. 30, 2005). The Constitutional Court held in Article 86 of the above Act that "if an employee of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83(1)2 with respect to the corporation's business, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under Article 83(1)2 of the above Act," that "the above provision of the Act, which is a applicable provision of the above facts charged, has retroactively lost its effect (the Constitutional Court Order 2010HunGa38, Oct. 28, 2010).
3. In conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.