도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. At around 12:50 on July 3, 2003, the Defendant, an employee of the Defendant, loaded and operated freight of more than 11.10 tons on the third axis of B truck in excess of 10 tons at the Incheon Incheon Business Office 16.5km in the direction of light-line Incheon, thereby violating the road management authority’s restriction on vehicle operation in relation to the Defendant’s duties.
2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Articles 86 and 83(1)2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995; Act No. 7832, Dec. 30, 2005; Act No. 7832, Dec. 30, 2005) to the facts charged. 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 be imposed on the corporation," that "the relevant provision of a fine under the relevant Article shall be imposed on the corporation," is unconstitutional (the Constitutional Court Order 2010Hun-Ga14,15,21,27, 27, 35, 38, 44, 70 (merger).
Thus, 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.