도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The Defendant is the owner of C truck. On August 6, 200, around 02:15, the Defendant violated C truck’s measurement leading signals by disregarding the CF’s measurement leading signals and operating the said vehicle, even though it was a road that restricts more than 10 tons of a stable weight, 40 tons of gross weight, 40 tons, 4m, 2.5m in width, and 16.7m in length from the heart of the CF on the duty of D, who is its employee.
2. The prosecutor charged a public action against the facts charged in the instant case by applying Articles 86 and 83(1)3 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995, and wholly amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005), and Article 86 of the same Act provides that “if an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits a violation provided for in Article 83(1)3 with respect to the business of the corporation, a fine provided for in the relevant Article shall be imposed on the corporation as well.” The same provision provides that “if an agent, employee or other worker of the corporation commits a violation provided for in Article 83(1)3 with respect to the business of the corporation, a fine provided for in the relevant Article shall be imposed on the corporation shall be imposed on the Constitutional Court
Therefore, the facts charged in this case constitute a crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.