도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant owned BF vehicles, and C, an employee of the Defendant, loaded and operated the freight exceeding the truck restriction weight in the mountain, mountain, and shot area of the National Road No. 15:06 on December 15, 1994.
2. As to the above facts charged, by applying Article 86 and Article 84 subparagraph 1 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545 of March 10, 1993, and by Act No. 4920 of January 5, 1995), the Seoul District Court issued a summary order of KRW 300,000 to the defendant as a fine for May 24, 1995, and the above summary order became final and conclusive around that time, but the defendant filed a petition for review of the above summary order on September 2, 2013 on the ground that the above provisions were unconstitutional.
On the other hand, Article 86 of the above Act provides that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 84 (1) in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the corresponding Article shall also be imposed on the corporation," the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that the 2011Hun-Ga24 Decided December 29, 201 should be unconstitutional. The above provision of the law was retroactively invalidated due to the decision of unconstitutionality.
3. In conclusion, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, it is so decided as per Disposition by the judgment of not guilty on the defendant under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act