도로법위반
The defendant is innocent.
1. The summary of the facts charged in this case is that A, an employee of the Defendant, operated a steel sn beam of 20.3 meters exceeding 3.6 meters in length on the street of the business office in Gwangju, the business office of which is around 14:05 kilometers from January 13, 2006, at around 89.5 kilometers in parallel with the 20.6 meters sn beam of H beam.
2. Determination
A. With respect to the above facts charged, the prosecutor filed a public prosecution against the defendant by applying Articles 86 and 83(1)2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005 and wholly amended by Act No. 8976 of Mar. 21, 2008).
B. Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545, Mar. 10, 193; Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995; Act No. 4920, Jun. 1, 1993); Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995; Act No. 7832, Dec. 30, 2005); Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 7832, Dec. 30, 2005; Act No. 7832, Dec. 30, 2005; Act No. 1954, Mar. 21, 2008; Act No. 945, Apr. 1, 2005; Act No. 9765, Mar. 19, 2005)
3. In conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, a judgment of innocence is rendered pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.