도로법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. Around 03:20 on January 21, 1994, the Defendant’s user of the facts charged of the instant case operated a vehicle A with respect to the Defendant’s business, and (i) around 03:20 on the road in front of the Jeonjin-gu Electric Power Station of the Korea Highway Corporation for Jeonjin-gu, Seoul, with a load of more than 11.1 ton on the third axis; and (ii) around 21:3 on February 18, 1994, the Defendant’s user failed to comply with the Defendant’s demand for measurement by the Department of Excessive Control while operating the said vehicle on the road in front of the Hannam-gun-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Gongju-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Gongju-gun, Gongju-gun,
2. As to Article 86 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) which is a joint penal provision of the facts charged in this case, among the applicable provisions of the Act to the facts charged in this case, the part that "where an agent, employee or other employee of a corporation commits a violation under subparagraph 1 of Article 84 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under the relevant provision of the Act, as well as the corporation, by the decision of the Constitutional Court on Dec. 29, 2011; and the part that "where an agent, employee or other employee of the corporation commits a violation under subparagraph 2 of Article 84 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall also be punished by a fine under the relevant provision of the Act, which is retroactively null and void pursuant to the proviso of each of the Act.
3. In conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.