도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. On November 12, 1996, A, an employee of the Defendant, was in violation of the restriction on the operation of the vehicles of the Road Management Agency by carrying at least 10 tons of total weight at least 40 tons at a local highway control station located in the mountain, mountain, and mountain, mountain, and mountain, mountain, and mountain, mountain, and mountain, mountain, and mountain, mountain, and mountain, mountain, and mountain, mountain, and mountain, mountain, and mountain, and mountain, of the Republic of Korea (Seoul) around 0:40 on November 12, 1996 with respect to the Defendant’s duties, while being aware that the area was a restricted area that cannot be operated, he/she violated the restriction on the operation of the vehicles of the Road Management Agency by excessively operating at a 4 metric
2. The prosecutor charged the facts charged of this case by applying Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995, and by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005), but the Constitutional Court rendered a decision on Oct. 28, 2010 (amended by Act No. 14, 15, 21, 27, 27, 35, 38, 44, 70 (Joint) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 86 of Oct. 28, 2010) that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83 (1) 2 of the former Road Act with respect to the business of the corporation, the portion that "a fine under the relevant Article shall also be imposed on the corporation is retroactively null and void."
Thus, the facts charged of 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.