도로법위반
The Defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment of innocence of this case is publicly notified.
1. The Defendant, as his employee, violated the restriction on vehicle operation of the road management authority by operating the vehicle with loaded freight exceeding 44.7 tons of the gross weight limitation level at the KRA business office around November 17, 2006, when the Defendant, at around 19:26, operated the B truck.
2. The prosecutor charged 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, and wholly amended by Act No. 8976 of Mar. 21, 2008) to the facts charged in this case. The Constitutional Court ruled in Article 86 that "where an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the relevant Article shall also be imposed on the corporation," and thus the part of the above Article 83 (1) of the same Act, which is applicable provisions of the facts charged, becomes retroactively null and void according to the above decision of unconstitutionality.
Thus, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment against the defendant is publicly announced under Article 58 (2) of