도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. On July 21, 1995, at around 00:36 on July 21, 1995, A, an employee of the Defendant, was in violation of the restriction on the operation of the vehicle by the road management authority by operating the cargo loaded with the cargo of 11.4 tons at the 2 axis of the above cargo vehicle in violation of the limitation on the 11.4 tons of the 11.4 tons of the above cargo vehicle on the 2 axis of the above cargo vehicle.
2. The prosecutor brought a public prosecution against the above charged facts 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).
On October 28, 2010, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "if an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits an act of violation pursuant to Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine pursuant to the provisions of Article 83 (2) of the former Road Act shall also be imposed on the corporation in violation of the Constitution" in Article 86 of the former Road Act and Article 47 (2) of the Constitutional Court Act retroactively lost its effect pursuant to the proviso of Article 86 of the former Road Act.
3. In conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.