도로법위반
The defendants are all innocent.
1. A violation of a summary order subject to review and a summary order subject to the summary order subject to review of the facts charged (to support the argument of the Daejeon District Court) at the time and place of a cargo driver, which belongs to the summary of the facts charged, against the gross weight of the restricted total weight of a cargo driver, B B B 940 on 04:30 on 25, 2002, B 04:30 on 2002, B B 939 on 06:30 on 08, 2002, 2002, B 06:30 on 16:30
2. As to each of the facts charged in the instant case, the public prosecutor filed a public prosecution 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).
However, Article 86 of the above Act provides that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense pursuant to Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall also be punished by a fine pursuant to the corresponding Article," the Constitutional Court shall be punished by a fine pursuant to the corresponding Article." < Amended by Act No. 997, Oct. 28, 2010>
Thus, since each of the facts charged in this case constitutes a case that does not constitute a crime, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.