도로법위반
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
1. On April 11, 1994, at around 20:39, the Defendant, as an employee, violated the restrictions on the operation of vehicles by the road management authority, by loading and operating the freight of 11.1 ton exceeding 10 ton of the limited weight on the C Truck on the East Institute National Highway of Gyeonggi-do.
2. As to the facts charged in the instant case, the prosecutor charged a public prosecution by applying Articles 86, 84, and 54(1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545, Mar. 10, 1993; Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995; Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995; a summary order of KRW 300,000 was notified and finalized in this court.
However, after the above summary order became final and conclusive, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "where an agent, employee, or other servant of a corporation commits an offence under Article 84 (1) in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the pertinent Article shall also be imposed on the corporation," which is in violation of the Constitution (Supreme Court Order 201Hun-Ga24 Decided December 29, 201). In accordance with the above decision of unconstitutionality, the provision of the above Act, which is applicable provisions of the facts charged, retroactively loses its effect.
3. According to the conclusion, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment against the defendant is publicly notified under Article 58(2) of