도로법위반
The accused shall disclose the summary of the judgment of innocence.
1. A, who is an employee of the Defendant of the charges, operated the Defendant’s vehicle in violation of the restriction on operation of the excessive vehicle at the street above the 7.4km Incheon Metropolitan Office of Business on March 1, 1994, around 00:23, at the top of the parallel line of the expressway.
2. Determination and conclusion, the effect of Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545, Mar. 10, 1993; Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995) which is the applicable provisions of the above facts charged was retroactively lost pursuant to the Constitutional Court Order 2012Hun-Ga18, Oct. 25, 2012 and the proviso of Article 47(2) of the Constitutional Court Act, which is the applicable provisions of the above facts charged. Accordingly, the above facts charged constitute a case not guilty under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment is publicly announced under Article 440 of the Criminal Procedure Act.