도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The summary of the facts charged is B truck driver, and the defendant is the owner of the above vehicle. On December 23, 2003, A, who is its employee, violated the restriction on vehicle operation of the road management authority by operating the above vehicle in the condition that it is loaded with the cargo exceeding 10 ton of 11.61 tons of the 10 ton of the 17:38 Gyeong-line 342.7km point in Busan in the direction of Busan on December 23, 2003.
2. The prosecutor prosecuted the facts charged in this case by applying Articles 86 and 83(1)2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005). The Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "where an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits a violation provided for in Article 83(1)2 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine provided for in the relevant Article shall be imposed on the corporation" in Article 86 of the same Act (the Constitutional Court Order 2010Hun-Ga14,15, 21, 27, 35, 44, 70 (combined) of the same Act) is unconstitutional (the Constitutional Court Order 2010Hun-Ga14, 15, 21, 27, 27, 38, 470 (combined) of the same Act). The part of the above legal provision, which is applicable provisions of the
Thus, the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.