도로법위반
The defendant is innocent.
1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendant’s employee violated the provisions on restrictions on the operation of vehicles by operating the said cargo vehicle under the status of 11.03 tons exceeding 10 tons out of the reduced weight of 10 tons when he loaded the said cargo on the B cargo at the Doksan Highway in the direction of Doknam Highway around December 10, 2004, when A, who is an employee of the Defendant, loaded the cargo at around 08:38 on December 10, 2004.
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. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995, and amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005) (Article 83 subparagraph 2 of the summary order subject to review is indicated as "Article 83 subparagraph 2" but "Article 83 (1) 2 seems to be a clerical error).
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. Thus, the facts charged in this case constitute a crime.